Proposition E and Why San Francisco Voters Should Oppose It | Hacker News Reader

Proposition E and Why San Francisco Voters Should Oppose It

eff.org

32 pointsblintz26 comments

SFPD no longer polices traffic. They have offered various excuses for why, but the fact is, citations are down over 90% from 2014. Anyone who stands by a busy intersection in SF during rush hour will see dozens of violations. I have no interest in expanding the power of the police force if they cannot make progress on this issue. In fact, I would move to relieve them of traffic duty, if this is the kind of result they are getting.

[0] https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/bayarea/heatherknight/article...

[1] https://abc7news.com/san-francisco-traffic-citations-pedestr...

[2] https://missionlocal.org/2024/02/sf-police-union-declares-im...

TIL Hamsterdam also legalized traffic violations

This measure has over $1 million is spending in favor of it, the most of any measure on the March ballot; several of the folks spending in favor of it are people in our industry (the CEO of Ripple has given $250k alone). Apparently, supporters have outspent opponents almost 10 to 1 (https://sfstandard.com/2024/01/22/london-breed-prop-e-san-fr...).

I hope the statements from the EFF and ACLU, which have both highlighted the negative privacy implications of the measure, help convince folks to vote no.

Ripple is not my industry, lol

there’s a rather obvious reason that predictive policing is “racist”, “biased”, “discriminatory”.

TLDR: It would give more power to the police department.

Facial recognition is not a substitute for the thousands of cops who quit in the wake of the Derick Chovin conviction. Say what you will about the merits of that prosecution, but the message cops themselves got was that if they actually do their job and arrest criminals, there is a chance that a politicized mob could send them to prison for the rest of their lives. The effect that had on police moral has been devastating and criminals have taken full advantage.

Being a cop is a high paying, low barrier to entry position. If cops quit because they want to stand in support of a convicted murderer then they definitely don’t belong in the force. Morale has nothing to do with doing your job, that sorry ass excuse wouldn’t work in any other job. The police union is a cause for most of these problems, they artificially restrict who can join the force. It needs to be dissolved and cops should be hired like a regular job, with clearances and training requirements.

>If cops quit because they want to stand in support of a convicted murderer then they definitely don’t belong in the force.

Its not that they are quitting to “stand in support” of Derik Chovin, they are quitting because they dont want themselves personally to end up like Chovin.

How do unions stop quality people from becoming cops?

It’s actually pretty easy to not end up like Chauvin. You don’t even have to quit. You just gotta decide you’re not gonna put your knee on someone’s neck for a few minutes after you’ve already subdued him.

Are you a cop? Thats great that you think Chovin was innocent. Cops disagree and thats why lots of them quit after that

He was convicted. Good riddance to the cops that quit after that, that’s perfect.

Re-read my comment. I do not think Chauvin was innocent. (nor am I a cop)

Sorry i meant to say that you think he’s guilty. And if you’re not a cop, who’s word are you taking that it’s easy to “not end up like Chovin”?

> How do unions stop quality people from becoming cops?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_unions_in_the_United_St...

This is just a link to the Wikipedia page on police unions. Where is there evidence that police unions prevent good candidates from being hired?

It's not a generic global union problem, it's a specific US Police U̶n̶i̶o̶n̶ Gang problem.

Crime rates are generally down since the pandemic-era spike and are still extremely low compared to the norms of the 80's and 90's.

And frankly, if anyone deserves credit for creating an "us vs them" mentality between citizens and the police, it's the police. Dating back at least as far as the start of the drug war.

Calling crime in the 80’s and 90’s a “norm” is quite the soft on crime position you have there and no, crime is still much higher than it was before the derik chovin conviction. Im not sure why you are bringing up covid in this context

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

Why do you think crime is up?

Crime spiked during the pandemic. Everyone knows this. Now it is down. They're called facts and you can look them up for free on the non-alt-right internet.

We outspend all other countries on policing by a wide margin. I think we'll be ok with a few thousand fewer cops (and no facial recognition).

> but the message cops themselves got was that if they actually do their job and arrest criminals, there is a chance that a politicized mob could send them to prison for the rest of their lives

That’s the message?

You know That cop killed a guy right? Suffocated him. On camera. If he just did his job and arrested him the politicized mob wouldn’t have put him behind bars. But the problem is he killed that guy, and it wasn’t some freak momentary lapse. He suffocated him. If cops are quitting because they’re worried they might go to jail for killing a completely incapacitated individual in a very deliberate manner, they might be doing society a favor.

The “mob” didn’t go after Chauvin for doing his job; they went after him for chocking the life out of a man over the course of nine minutes.

Any cop who has low morale because of the Chauvin convection shouldn’t be a cop.

Cops don't get a license for public executions. I appreciate your pearl clutching, but reject your premise on its face.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com