Daly pisses us off
Charles writes:
"My neighbor told me about this site, and I think it's great! I live nr Post and Jones, and I snapped this picture while walking back from work this afternoon (I work for the City, in the Civic Center).
I want to point out three thinsg in this picture: first, the man with his back to the camera is taking a whiz in between the two cars. I know, that's obvious! Second, that big green thing about 50 feet past him is one of those high-tech automated toilets that the City spent a zillion dollasr on. Third, that's the Tenderloin Police Station right at the corner.
Smoe people would blame this situation on the man urinating in public, and I suppose that's fair. Others might blame it on the Police, but I have friends in the SFPD, and they've told me that the Police Department won't really deal with these sorts of things because (a) the District Attorney's office puts a very low priority on prosecuting them and (b) becuase Chris Daly has such an antagonistic relationship with the SFPD that they don't get any support from him for dealing with these sorts of problems. I've heard that he's stalling on the Mayor's plan to put more police on the streets, which is hardly surprising, considering that he's so anti-police.
Basically, if we keep Chris Daly, we can look forward to 4 mroe years of people whizzing in the streets. Ha ha! No thansk!"
"My neighbor told me about this site, and I think it's great! I live nr Post and Jones, and I snapped this picture while walking back from work this afternoon (I work for the City, in the Civic Center).
I want to point out three thinsg in this picture: first, the man with his back to the camera is taking a whiz in between the two cars. I know, that's obvious! Second, that big green thing about 50 feet past him is one of those high-tech automated toilets that the City spent a zillion dollasr on. Third, that's the Tenderloin Police Station right at the corner.
Smoe people would blame this situation on the man urinating in public, and I suppose that's fair. Others might blame it on the Police, but I have friends in the SFPD, and they've told me that the Police Department won't really deal with these sorts of things because (a) the District Attorney's office puts a very low priority on prosecuting them and (b) becuase Chris Daly has such an antagonistic relationship with the SFPD that they don't get any support from him for dealing with these sorts of problems. I've heard that he's stalling on the Mayor's plan to put more police on the streets, which is hardly surprising, considering that he's so anti-police.
Basically, if we keep Chris Daly, we can look forward to 4 mroe years of people whizzing in the streets. Ha ha! No thansk!"
posted by the clicker at 7:53 PM
5 Comments:
I can't absolve the SFPD 100%; I'll agree with you there.
But never in the recent history of San Francisco has ANY elected official had a more antagonistic attitude towards law enforcement. From civil disobedience to yelling at an officer that he was going to get him fired, to introducing Prop. H -- the handgun ban that the SFPD fought against because it actually made San Franciscans LESS safe, to blocking the passage of the Mayor's proposal to add $2.4 million in supplementary funding for putting more cops on the street, Daly clearly prefers to be at odds with the SFPD. Well, Supervisors come and go, but the SFPD will always be here, so it's vital to be able to work with them. This he will not do.
When Daly was first voted in, 6 years ago, he inherited the Tenderloin as part of the District. But during those 6 years, NOT ONCE did he propose anything to address the rising crime levels here. Finally, 3 weeks ago, he made his first ever statement, in support of Ross Mikrikami's "Police Foot Patrol" proposal.
In a word, this clown waits until a month and a half before election day to take ANY stand on fighting crime, and he does so by doing nothing more than chiming in with another district's supervisor! In the meantime, since Daly has been District 6's Supe, the Tenderloin has had approximately 40 murders, 75 rapes, 1,500 robberies and about the same number of assaults.
Q: Why did it take Daly 6 years to figure out that we need more help?
A: He hates the cops.
Some years ago the Cincinnati police lost a civil rights lawsuit over intitutional racism. They consequently pulled an unofficial but clearly coordinated sulk against the (highly segregated) black neighborhoods of Cincinnati. Apparently they couldn't stand being told to keep their oaths to uphold the Constitution and the laws.
I've been wondering for some time if something similar is going on around here. Tender-Nob, do you have genuine information to confirm my guess or are you just sounding off?
Seriously, if anyone reading this has genuine personal knowledge that SFPD officers are intentionally placing the public in danger by refusing to uphold their oaths and peform their duties, you should report such illegal conduct to... well, the police, actually. But also the District Attorney, and probably the state Attorney General.
Martha, the Tenderloin (and D6 in general) is the most ethnically diverse district in town. The police department is likewise fully representative of the various ethnicities it serves. Claiming racism is simply untenable.
San Francisco has very active public and governmental oversight of the Police Department. When there is even a hint of impropriety, it gets picked up by those watchdogs, and responded to appropriately.
You asked "do you have genuine information to confirm my guess or are you just sounding off?" Well, I've given you statistics about our steadily rising crime rate during Chris Daly's watch. I've pointed out that -- in defiance of the neighborhood and the PD's wishes--Chris Daly has fought against installling surveillance cameras in the most crime-ridden areas. I've explained that the supplementary funding that's been earmarked for putting officers on the sidewalk to reduce crime has been put on hold by Chris Daly in retaliation for the SFPD endorsing Rob Black.
What "genuine information" do you have to the contrary?
I don't think you understood what I wrote. I was making a comparison to the Cincinnati case, which involved racism. I did not say racism was involved here (sometimes arguably it is, but that's another conversation). I said I saw a parallel in that our police officers also may be in an unseemly political work-to-rule sulk against being told to respect people's civil rights.
If you hadn't noticed, the biggest reason for civil rights violations in this town is economic prejudice. People who look visibly poor get abused. Just for example, they get jaywalking tickets but prosperous-looking people don't.
I don't think you understood the question I asked you either. I asked you if you had any information to show that the police department was in fact slacking off on law enforcement in District 6 out of spite at our Supervisor.
Well, do you?
And do you think it's right for police officers to refuse to do their jobs just because someone tells them to respect civil rights?
How could I possibly have any information about a situation I've never even heard of?! No, I know nothing about any alleged conspiracy involving police officers intentionally not doing their jobs.
If it were true, I would be 100% behind taking the appropriate legal action against them. But until someone actually comes forward with substantive evidence to support such a claim, it seems to me like a smoke screen by the Chris Daly gang to divert attention from his deplorable 6-year record on dealing constructively with crime in our district. Like the OJ Simpson trial, it's always easier to avoid responsibility by creating doubt in the minds of others.
Remember: it's D6 that has experienced the majority of the growth in crime over the past 6 years. It would have to be a remarkably elaborate and secret conspiracy to target a single district and fly under everyone's radar.
And what you see as police harrassment of people who are "visibly poor", I see as the tail wagging the dog. If a person wants to not be discriminated against because of the way they look so they can get a job or an apartment or a date, they can clean themselves up and behave in a respectable way. It's exactly the same with the police. I have no doubt that the police behave differently towards people who look and act like scum. But that has nothing to do with money. There's a Mexican family of seven living in a one-bedroom apartment in my building, and they're allways clean and respectible,even though I know that their household income is well below the poverty line. The police would never harrass them. Earning the respect of the police has more to do with self-respect and dignity, than with income.
Post a Comment
<< Home