09-15-2023, 01:07 PM
(09-15-2023, 12:40 PM)hollodero Wrote: I would agree with that, employers should probably be disallowed to force their employees to personally stop thieves and robbers. If a law said just that, I'd see no issue... but it does not. It makes it illegal to intervene, that much is clear from the linked article.
Indeed. The article explains the law rather well.
Quote:My ability to put myself in Californian shopkeeper's shoes, or Californian shoes as a whole, ist for sure limited. But there is a stark increase in crime in that state, including thievery. 400 millions loss through thievery in 2022 alone? That is stark.
That's $400 million for Target alone. Let that sink in, $400 million in losses for a single retailer. Of course, people who actually purchase items like civilized people are the ones who absorb this loss through higher prices.
Quote:And I for one can full well understand how frustrating and enraging it must be if the response from lawmakers just is, well we ban everyone from showing civil courage, in fact we declare it illegal to do so, just as the thievery itself. Which is, put it that way, further easing the deed and will not deter future thieves at all. Imho, that is a real fair issue to raise.
We have a saying at work, in California cops are criminals, criminals are victims and victims are invisible. Literally everything proposed is about making it harder to deter crime, enabling criminals and lessening penalties.
https://ktla.com/news/california/california-will-release-76k-inmates-early-including-violent-felons/
More than 63,000 inmates convicted of violent crimes will be eligible for good behavior credits that shorten their sentences by one-third instead of the one-fifth that had been in place since 2017.
That includes nearly 20,000 inmates who are serving life sentences with the possibility of parole.
That's from 2021, but please believe this kind of thing continues. We have a DA who intentionally mischarges criminals so they face fewer penalties. I could literally give thousands of examples. We had a 17 year old, who was turning eighteen the next month, commit seven armed robberies in the span of a weekend. He robbed people at gun point. When he was finally caught our joke of a DA charged him with seven counts of attempted robbery. No firearm enhancement on any of the charges btw.
Why did he charge him with attempted robbery when every single one of the robberies was successful? Because 211 PC (robbery), is a 707(b) WIC offense, meaning a juvenile with a sustained charge for it can, and will receive a strike. But Gascon has stated it is unfair for juveniles to accrue a strike offense that will follow them into adulthood (except in extreme cases like murder), hence the gross mischarge by his office. We had another seventeen year old, also very close to turning eighteen, who stabbed a guy twelve times in the face, neck and torso. Attempted murder you would think, right? Nope, a single count of 245(a)(1) PC (assault with a deadly weapon). What happened to him, he was placed in an open setting group home. Oh, and he was arrested for murder less than two months later when he used a knife to fatally injure a victim during a robbery. I'm not exaggerating a little when I tell you I could give you literally over a thousand examples just from the past year.
Quote:And musing about rule of law versus law and order, imho, misses the point. You might be right about the semantics, but it's about the law and the mindset it represents.
When it comes down to engaging in semantics or facing the complete and utter failure of Democratic policies a partisan has little choice. The GOP has their issues, lord knows, but the Dems have inflicted far more human misery with their soft on crime and anti-law enforcement rhetoric and policies. The ironic thing is that the majority of this crime occurs in the "black and brown" (I loathe that term btw) neighborhoods that these politicians pretend to care about. When I say I could never vote for a Democrat again, I mean it. I've seen first hand just how destructive their policies are and when confronted by their failures they just double down, as seen in the new CA law.
