The SFPD may choose not to enforce laws, but I don't think anyone outside of SFPD directed that, it's just organized nonfeasance as leadership political protest.
Nope, this is fake news. You should learn more about your DA Chesa Boudin. He rarely brings cases to trial, fired a bunch of prosecutors and 30 others have left, and removed cash bail which puts repeat offenders right back on the street after arrest.
The political and social climate in SF has led to a situation where the number of officers on the street can shrink even if the budget stays flat or grows.
If the police can't stop crime and enforce the laws of 47 square miles and 874,961 residents for the princely sum of $755 per person/year or $14 million per square mile/year what exactly are people paying for? Like if I told you that you pay $62/mo for a police subscription and this was the service you were going to get for it, would you still subscribe to it? Probably not.
It's a protection racket. Lower the police budget even in a non-meaningful way just a little and they hold the city to ransom. Just scrap it and start again from scratch, perhaps trying Peelian principles instead of relying on the corrupted outgrowth of slave hunter patrols.
All fingers point back to the electorate.
Burning it down to the ground, and rebuilding will of course create pretty much the same thing, and probably worse.
From the article. This isn’t normal
They pay and treat their employees terribly along with pushing junk food and other garbage to people just trying to fill a prescription.
We are excited for quality, owner operated pharmacies to return and replace them. Just like they served us before Walgreens came in and muscled them all out of business.
It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
What makes you think that the owner operated pharmacies won't be targeted by shoplifters? Are a significant chunk of the shoplifters doing it for ideological reasons?
>It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
Sounds like victim blaming to me. The whole point of having laws and law enforcement is to have an official way to pay your dues to the community and get protection in return, rather than having to pay for "protection" from the community itself.
Footage from the LA Riots.
“I am completely devastated by this news - this Walgreens is less than a mile from seven schools and has been a staple for seniors, families and children for decades. This closure will significantly impact this community.”
https://twitter.com/ahsha_safai/status/1447988178586013698?s...
Owner-operated pharmacies have been out of business for decades. I'm sure you yearn for the days of Blockbuster video or, better still, your neighborhood video stores. No Netflix for you, right?
Check out anywhere in the US more than 100 miles from an Ocean
Walgreens is not 'pushing' anything on anyone - people make choices to buy Doritos.
More importantly -> they're going there for the Doritos as much as anything else.
Walgreens has incredible economies of scale and operational expertise. They know what people want, they know how to keep the shelves stocked efficiently, which is not exactly novel, but it's hard for mom and pop shops to do.
If SF residents truly wanted 'independent pharmacies' for prescriptions, they would have been using them already.
As far as 'employee treatment' - maybe there is something there, but I'm doubtful if it rises to the threshold that we'd want them closed.
'The Problem' is entirely San Francisco's insane attitudes towards crime.
And finally, most poignantly, those criminals will steal from the 'locally owned stores' just as well, and they won't have 500 other locations to absorb the losses.
This is an SF civic problem.
Get SF to act rationally - and then - maybe it's possible to have a discussion about 'locally owned' shops etc..
> Rodriguez is finally in jail, but he rode the city’s revolving door of justice to allegedly rip off Walgreens 37 times this year. He was particularly partial to the drug store at 91-08 Roosevelt Ave. in Jackson Heights, which he hit 23 times, police said.
Right, but even if 46 arrests in a year isn't representative of the median shoplifter, it's still an appalling example. Why is the justice system so ineffective that a shoplifter is allowed to be arrested 46 times in a year? You'd think by the 4th or 5th one he'd be denied bail.
Probably not though. I bet there are dozens if not hundreds more like him.
These huge businesses like Walmart, Walgreens and Starbucks target and study successful mom and pop businesses and then move in ruthlessly. In Portland I've seen so many great local businesses destroyed because they couldn't compete with the large chains. And, if that eventually doesn't work out for the chain, they close up shop.
Amazon and Walmart have destroyed small mom and pop grocery stores across the country.
I bet these retail gangs wouldn't go after a mom and pop shop of any kind. The owner would probably fight them with their bare hands. That's why they are going after Walgreens.
In some weird way, this feels like capitalism, actually. It's just a hidden facet we don't see often.
That's a big assumption...If elderly Asian people are being attacked on the streets, I don't think their moral code extends to mom and pop shops, even if they're willing to throw down, unless they bring out guns.
I'm beginning to prefer that theory. Explains some motives a little better.
What other excuses do you have?
Now we are all dead. Thanks, racism.
I wonder how they arrived at this number of 46x.
46x the chain average of single minutes spent reviewing security staff resumes?
46x the chain average of security camera photos sent to LEOs?
46x the average number of bic lighters placed further back? No, up more? No, up and back higher, like where you can't reach? No, they can really jump that high, so up higher?
> our investments in security measures in stores
Clearly this refers to their dollar expenditure on security measures, however that had been accounted.
