Another Reason the Chicken Crossed the Road

Police Lt. Jonathan Ozol in a SF crosswalk

San Francisco police have a new crime-fighting initiative. They're tagging drivers who don't stop for officers who are dressed as inflatable chickens.

On Monday morning [Sept. 16], San Francisco police Lt. Jonathan Ozol wore a flamboyant, inflatable chicken costume as he attempted to navigate a crosswalk on Alemany Boulevard near the intersection of Rousseau Street. The purpose of the exercise was to issue tickets to drivers who flouted state law by not yielding to a pedestrian like Ozol as he attempted to cross. Quite a few drivers failed that test.

The ostentatious costume, according to police Capt. Amy Hurwitz, serves two purposes. “I don’t want them to get run over,” she told me. “But the costume is so bright, it’s like, how can you miss it?”

...State law requires drivers to stop for pedestrians who are entering a crosswalk. Ozol said that failing to do so can result in a citation that could cost the driver a hefty fine of as much as $400.

...Ozol would attempt to enter the crosswalk, and if a driver didn’t yield and allow him to cross, he would wave at two other officers parked nearby. From there, one of the two officers — one on a motorcycle, and the other in a standard squad car — would follow the flagged driver and pull them over.

The numerous tickets and the irresistible publicity have had the desired effect: drivers are slowing down.

Your humble blogger laughed, too, but I think that those who mock the chicken/Big-Bird costumes as a "stunt" have an anti-SF or anti-police agenda.

Kudos to SFPD for their creativity, and coming up with a strategy that appears to be working.

O.J.'s Legacy

The 1994 Bronco "chase" (spectrum)

Every newspaper (yes, I still read at least three of them every day) has carried obituaries of O.J. Simpson, who died this Wednesday from cancer at the age of 76. His outstanding career in college and professional football and his subsequent work in film, TV, and advertising alone merited pages, but the big story was his 1994-1995 trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman. WSJ columnist Peggy Noonan captures that unique, "crazy" period in history:

Our crazy country. The O.J. Simpson case was the beginning of knowing we were crazy and admitting it. It was 30 years ago this June, the murder followed by the Bronco chase, and I find myself wanting to tell those who weren’t there what a sensation it was, what an amazement.

Everyone over 40 this weekend will be saying, “I’ll never forget when I heard the verdict,” and, “Did you watch the Bronco?” The case burned itself into our retinas; everyone in the country was in the path of totality.

As much as anything and more than most, the story was the beginning of the modern media age. It was the beginning of hypercelebrity and marked by the emotionalism of crowds. Crowds ran to California freeway overpasses on June 17, 1994, to see the Ford Bronco containing Simpson roll by, surrounded by police cruisers. They cheered and pumped their arms. They didn’t see it as a tragedy, the story of the beautiful young woman and mother, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her 25-year-old friend, Ron Goldman, who had been brutally stabbed to death. They saw an exciting drama unfolding before their eyes, like Al Capone shooting his way out of a bank heist surrounded by cops. Simpson was a guy everyone liked. So they cheered. And people watching thought: Whoa, what are we seeing, what is this?

Some new kind of fame was being presaged. A close friend of O.J.’s, Los Angeles lawyer and businessman Robert Kardashian, an apparently quiet fellow no one had heard of, was thrust into the case from the beginning. At a news conference he read a public letter from O.J., just before he turned himself in. The letter said he had nothing to do with Nicole’s murder. “I loved her. . . . If we had a problem, it’s because I loved her so much.” It was classic abusive-husband patter.

Kardashian, like other O.J. attorneys, would become famous, and the fame would be a lesson to many. After fame comes wealth and power and everyone gives you a good table. It is probably true that none of this was lost on his former wife, Kris, who had been one of Nicole Simpson’s best friends, or on his children, Kourtney, Kim, Khloe and Rob. Their show, “Keeping Up With The Kardashians,” debuted in 2007. They were the first reality-TV family, famous for being famous. They are billionaires now.

“It marked the end of cozy, afternoon soap opera entertainment and ushered in a tabloid culture of Kardashians, Jenners, and lesser beings,” former Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter said by email. “Also, it made, for a time, Dominick Dunne the most recognized print reporter in the world.” Dunne’s colorful and breathless reports each month in Vanity Fair covered the case like a blanket—who snubbed whom in the courtroom, who said what at Brentwood’s glittering dinner tables...

If the signal moment was the Bronco chase, it was the court case that would have lasting significance. It was a prime example of how our legal system got bogged down in distractions, inanities, and poor police and legal work. It dragged on nine months. The judge, Lance Ito, also became a celebrity, and apparently liked it. He kept three open computers on his bench. No one had ever seen that before. Jay Leno on “The Tonight Show” had a regular sketch, the “Dancing Itos.” There were endless, meandering objections. The prosecutor, Marcia Clark, had to get her hair and makeup done, and a new wardrobe.

And the cast of characters! Kato Kaelin, the house guest who never left. Mark Fuhrman, the police detective who seemed solid on evidence and then was torn apart for having once used racial epithets and was accused of planting evidence.

And the phrases that bubbled up from the courtroom and entered the national consciousness: “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.”

And, of course, the terrible and historic moment when the jury announced its verdict.

The trial felt like it had gone forever but the verdict came in within a day. No one in America did a bit of work from the moment it was announced that the jury had a verdict. Everyone ran to a TV set. From Robert D. McFadden’s O.J. obit in the New York Times: “Even President Bill Clinton left the Oval Office to join his secretaries. In court, cries of ‘Yes!’ and ‘Oh, no!’ were echoed across the nation as the verdict left many Black people jubilant and many white people aghast.” Exactly true.

A friend wrote Thursday afternoon: “Trial as spectacle has been with us for a long time (think Lizzie Borden), and so have juries doing unusual things. But this seemed to take it to a new level. If memory serves, the volume of the New York Stock Exchange went down to basically nothing for a few minutes as the verdict was announced. That’s real.”

Reaction famously fell almost completely along racial lines. It was one of those 20th-century moments when you realized race is here to stay as an unending factor, an unyielding actor in American life. White and black saw two different realities. Whites: All the evidence points to his guilt, he’s one of the most admired men in America, race isn’t the story here.

Blacks: This is what you do to black men, you railroad them on cooked-up evidence, there’s plenty of room for doubt.

It showed in some new and unforgettable way the divided country. The verdict itself didn’t divide the country; it revealed it, again and not for the last time, as divided. Reaction was called shocking, revelatory. But what it was, was simpler. It was painful. It left you with a tight and mournful feeling in your throat.

Before O.J., American blacks lacked confidence in the legal system. After O.J., everyone lacked confidence in the legal system. It looked cynical, performative, agenda-driven, not on the level.

I would say he got away with murder because I believe he was guilty. But in a way he didn’t get away with it; it stalked him the rest of his life. And that is tragedy, too, because he’d been such a hero, a winner of the Heisman Trophy, a football star, a man of great accomplishment whom everyone admired.

That’s all.

The O.J. case revealed so much and started a new age. Within a few years the internet would become ubiquitous, and at that point the new age would become more so.

I remember going to lunch at a popular bar-restaurant in San Francisco. Instead of the TV being tuned to sports, it showed a slow-moving Ford Bronco being trailed by police cars on an LA freeway. I couldn't hear the sound and had no idea what the fuss was about.

Over the next year, one could not avoid the O.J. Simpson story; it was on all the network news. In their thirst for material reporters unearthed every scrap of information about every character in the drama: the defense team, the prosecution, law enforcement, and witnesses. Many cashed in on their new found fame.

The O.J. Simpson trial showed how much society had regressed in the late 20th century. Tribalism had taken hold; it didn't matter what you did, what group you belonged to determined whether you deserved punishment, facts and evidence be damned. It was okay to exploit the tragedy of a double murder if it meant a lucrative book deal.

The genie was out of the bottle, and there would be no turning back.

Hands-Free Was Impossible

Ron Nagasawa of Midweek writes about a driving incident ("Phone Spam") that could only happen in Hawaii.

Zippy's spam musubi

I am a huge proponent of no hands-on mobile phone use while driving. The first thing I told my daughter when she got her driver's license was there would be no texting or talking on her mobile phone while driving. Any instance, and I mean any, and she would lose her license, period.

These days that doesn't seem to be an issue, as many newer cars are equipped with hands-free everything for your mobile phone. Unfortunately, I still see people on the road talking on their hand-held phone or texting at stoplights.

We all know it only takes one unfortunate mishap to change your life. Same goes for drunk or "buzzed" driving. I have to say, I've really noticed a lot of people being mindful of that and engage the use of a designated driver or ride sharing services. And lately, I've been seeing commercials about distracted driving.

I have to confess that I do drink coffee while driving and have an occasional snack or sandwich, but never when I'm driving in a residential area or in a city block with traffic stops. I only partake in the practice if I'm moving on the freeway.

The other morning I decided to provide a local-style breakfast - a platter of Spam musubi from Zippy's - for my staff. I threw this breakfast of champions on the passenger seat next to me and as I entered the freeway to get to work, I started to sip my coffee. If you've ever had a Spam musubi from Zippy's, you know that the urge to eat one is strong. It almost flies into your hand like Thor's hammer. Well, the next thing I knew I was biting into one of these savory offerings. I alternated it with hits of hot coffee and my life was feeling pretty darn good. There weren't many cars on the road so I was cruising.

That's when in the distance I saw a motorcycle cop pointing a speed radar gun at me. I was not speeding, I never do. That's because I drive a German sports car, albeit 15 years old, but it's still a cop magnet.

I saw him wave at me to pull over. Great, just when I was having a nice peaceful morning with my coffee and Spam musubi. I rolled down my window as he walked up, confident that I couldn't possibly have been speeding.

He politely asked to see my driver's license and I asked what I did wrong. He said, "Were you talking on your cell phone while driving?" I wasn't, but then realized he must have mistaken the Spam musubi for a mobile phone!

I said no and he politely asked me to show him my call history on my phone. I was too embarrassed to say what I was actually doing, but he said OK and I could be on my way. I caught a lucky break.

Good thing because I had already eaten the evidence.

I do think that the writer embellished the tale to come up with a good finishing line -- "I had already eaten the evidence"-- when there was a platter of substitutes to show the police officer, but the story is otherwise plausible.

One can easily mistake the rectangular spam musubi for a cellphone held to one's lips in the speakerphone position.

Next time he should buy a box of malasadas.

San Francisco: Better and Harder

Chesa Boudin (KQED photo)

San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin has taken the heat for the explosion of crime ("San Francisco gun violence rose last year, with shootings up 33%") in San Francisco.

But leniency towards criminals was only one part of his campaign. Another promise was "holding officers accountable for wrongdoing."

SF Police Chief Bill Scott is now terminating an agreement to cooperate in police-use-of-force investigations with the DA's office.

Chief Bill Scott (Chron photo)

Chief Scott claims that prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence in the trial of Officer Terrance Stangel, who beat a man with a baton. [bold added]

Nicole Pifari, an attorney for Stangel, claimed that the District Attorney’s Office withheld incriminating evidence from police as they investigated the man Stangel allegedly beat, Dacari Spiers. That evidence — that Spiers was allegedly beating his girlfriend prior to the altercation with Stangel — may have helped lead to criminal charges against Spiers, Pifari argued.

In her motion to dismiss the case, Pifari said [Magen] Hayashi, the district attorney’s investigator, failed to inform the police department of a follow-up interview with a witness who reported seeing Spiers assaulting his girlfriend. The defense alleged that Hayashi then lied about it by saying she had no further contact with the witness when providing police with an update on the investigation.

Pifari claimed Stangel was justified in his use of force under the circumstances.

In responding to Pifari’s questions under oath Thursday, Hayashi said she was pressured to sign the affidavit against Stangel after removing exculpatory information.

Asked who pressured her, she said, “it was a general understanding in my experience in this office, if you don’t sign these things you’ll be fired.”

Police are held to high standards of ethical behavior. The DA's office is also held to high standards and in its oversight role has allegedly broken them. Meanwhile, pity poor Magen Hayashi, who will be thrown under the bus because Chesa Boudin will act shocked to discover that anyone in his office would lie on an affidavit.

In San Francisco criminals, who are regularly released without bail, enjoy the bonus of law enforcement at loggerheads with itself.

Whatever his personal beliefs in what's going on in the once-beautiful City, your humble blogger is a believer in democracy. San Francisco is getting what it voted for, good and hard.

Good, Albeit Biased News

L to R: Anthony Robinson, Derje Blanks, Cameron Moody (KRON4)

The hate-crime articles usually start with the history of racism against Asians.

First is the mention of the Chinese Exclusion Act (1882-1943), and next the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. After these two indisputable and shameful examples, writers often add the 1982 murder of Vincent Chin, who was killed by Detroit auto workers who thought he was Japanese, or the difficulty of the Vietnamese "boat people" in being accepted in America.

The history always ends with President Donald Trump and his accusations that the COVID-19 virus originated in China and the alleged scapegoating of Chinese people by President Trump and/or Republicans.

From these articles one would have thought that the violent attacks against Asian-Americans were perpetrated by MAGA-hat wearing, white supremacist trogolydtes, but one would be wrong.

Asians, at least in the Bay Area, have learned to ignore these politicized narratives because they're useless in ascertaining who is originating the current attacks (let's just say that only a minority are white, and the most violent are not).

The police finally caught a group of men who have been targeting Asians (photo at the top of this post): [bold added]

Two men have been charged with robbery in connection to dozens of purse snatchings targeting Asian women throughout the Bay Area, the Santa Clara County district attorney said Saturday.

The men — Derje Blanks, 23, and Anthony Robinson, 24 — were also charged with hate crime enhancements. The office for District Attorney Jeff Rosen said the suspects “used ethnic slurs to refer to their victims,” who were almost all of Asian descent.

“We will hold these defendants and anyone who worked with them fully accountable for their ignorant and destructive behavior,” Rosen said in a press release.

Blanks and Robinson were arrested by San Jose and Hayward police on September 8. Robinson fled in a vehicle and ran a red light, colliding with another car and injuring a two-year-old and her father, according to police.

A third suspect was arrested on Thursday, ending what SJPD called “yearlong, multi-jurisdictional investigation” into the “prolific robbery crew.”

The crime spree began in late 2020, according to the district attorney’s office. The pattern was nearly always the same: The men would follow women in parking lots to their cars, wait until the victim was inside her car and either smash a window or quickly open the door to steal a purse off the passenger seat.

Sometimes, the incidents became violent. There were “numerous incidents where victims were pulled or wrestled to the ground,” and some were injured, according to the district attorney.

Evidence shows that the defendants targeted the victims because they “believed that Asian women don’t use banks.”

“We are sensitive to the hate aspect targeting Asian females,” San Jose police chief Anthony Mata said in a release. “I commend District Attorney Jeff Rosen for pursuing hate crime enhancements.”

The Chronicle has published numerous articles and opinion pieces of the sort discussed at the top, that is, they strongly imply that Donald Trump and his followers are responsible for the recent spate of attacks on Asians.

This article, reprinted in its entirety, never discloses the race of the men arrested. (The photo of the suspects, not a MAGA hat among them, was pulled from the KRON4 website.) For many of the people in the media, if the facts contradict their politics, don't disclose the facts.

Mexico: Where Political Assassinations are Normal

Politics is indeed a rough business, with opposition researchers delving into every aspect of a candidate's past. What was once personal and off-limits is now fair, or should we say foul, game.

Once in a while Americans should be reminded how lucky they are to have political campaigns that destroy candidates, but only metaphorically.

Popular mayoral candidate and former prosecutor Abel
Murrieta was killed on May 13. (Mexico News Daily)

Headline: Dozens of Mexican Candidates Have Been Killed in a Bloody Election Season [bold added]

Even in a country with a history of electoral violence, this vote is shaping up as the most bloody in recent memory as more, smaller criminal gangs viciously compete to control local areas by intimidating or killing off politicians.

From February to April, 46 elected officials, members of political parties and candidates for office were killed, a 44% jump compared with the 2018 elections, according to Integralia, a Mexican political consulting firm. Since September, when the electoral process began, 82 politicians have been killed, most of them gunned down.

With politicians unable to protect themselves, many of them have withdrawn their candidacies. The gangs are the authority in various towns, and with little or no resistance to confront them, are expanding their operations:

Aside from trafficking drugs to the U.S., these gangs smuggle migrants, sell black-market gasoline, and extort legal businesses which range from avocado farms to taco stands. Once in control of local governments, the gangs also take a cut of tax money meant for public works, according to organizations that track and analyze crime trends.

As more of their income comes from activities such as extortion, these groups’ success depends on their ability to control territory. That means controlling, through threats and bribery, the local mayor, police chief, and other top officials. Those who don’t cooperate are often killed.

The environment in Mexico is so horrifying that we can't imagine how it could be transplanted here.

Meanwhile the progressive leadership in California is pushing for open borders, defunding the police, and more restrictions on private gun ownership. I really do need to learn Spanish...

Guns: Stuck in the Same Old Arguments

SF Police Commissioner John Hamasaki (Chron)

Speaking as one who has never owned a gun, I nevertheless comprehend the motivation of law-abiding citizens to own guns, especially if they believe the police cannot reliably protect them. Reducing gun violence must accommodate the on-the-ground reality of living or working in dangerous neighborhoods. That's why it was refreshing to see San Francisco Police Commissioner John Hamasaki call for understanding for the teen when the NY police seized a gun from the 17-year-old:

“Uncomfortable truth,” Hamasaki wrote in the tweet. “Taking a gun from one kid may as likely stop violence as end up in that kid getting killed. It may feel good to post this photo, but I’ve known too many kids who were killed for being in the wrong neighborhood (often their own) & being unable to protect themselves.”

San Francisco Supervisors Catherine Stefani, Myrna Melgar, and Ahsha Safai immediately called for Commissioner Hamasaki's resignation because he deviated from the absolutist no-gun position. IMHO, he responded reasonably:

Hamasaki responded that he “actually work(s) and spend(s) time in the communities impacted by gun violence.”

“I have had clients and their families killed by guns, and I have consoled the fathers, mothers, and children killed by guns,” he continued. “The world is bigger and more complicated than D2 and the Marina.”

Hamasaki said he was not calling for teens to be armed, but for nuance in the debate.

“I think the reading of (the tweet) that some people took was a little bit disingenuous,” Hamasaki said. “I don’t want, approve or encourage people to use guns to solve their problems.”

Hamasaki said while it’s a great idea to take guns off the streets, the realities for some neighborhoods are more complex.

“When you simplify it, it justifies the system of mass incarceration that we have,” he said. “I just have a real hard time passing the same level of judgment to a kid who’s living in a neighborhood infested by drugs and violence.”

The politics of the main actors may be a little surprising:

Stefani and Safai are known as the two moderate Democrats on the Board of Supervisors, while Hamasaki more closely aligns with the city’s more left-leaning contingency.

It's not an election year, so now is the time to question and test assumptions about gun violence without worrying about what political opponents will say. Otherwise, we'll stay stuck in the same decades-old arguments.

San Francisco: Burglaries Are "Rampant"

Tourists to San Francisco are almost non-existent thanks to the pandemic (and homelessness and car smash-and-grabs and closed restaurants etc.), so the burglars have switched to breaking into stores.

Rampant burglaries plague San Francisco businesses, compounding the hurt of the pandemic

Across San Francisco, businesses are hiring armed security guards, pouring thousands into replacing shattered windows and even pulling up stakes amid a rash of commercial theft and vandalism.

Burglaries in San Francisco have spiked by 62% so far this year, rising from 691 reported incidents in 2020 to 1,123 as of mid-February. The break-ins have been particularly glaring in a city where overall crime is down by 31%, and San Francisco’s once most seemingly intractable crime — car break-ins — has plummeted by 52%...

Most of the burglaries in San Francisco are never solved. What police call the “clearance rate” — the percentage of arrests per reported crime — was 8.1% for burglaries this year to date, down from 14.5% by this time last year, according to police data.

As we've opined before, Progressive government proclaims the unimportance of property versus caring for people, and the surge in property crime was easily foreseeable. "Petty" theft ($950 or less) is a misdemeanor and on the police back-burner; "most...are never solved." Well, people may be the priority, but I don't see a lot of happy people in San Francisco.

The election is over, the winners safely installed, and negative information can't be used by Republicans. The Chronicle has now resumed reporting.

Strained Relationship

Levi's Stadium: not much revenue these days (NBC photo)

In this unusual political season the locals are talking about a single $3 million contribution to a campaign, not for a House seat or State Proposition or a seat in the State Assembly but to replace the Santa Clara City Council: [bold added]

This week’s decision by Santa Clara County not to allow fans at 49ers games, despite getting the OK for limited ticket sales from California’s health department, is the latest blow in a strained relationship between the football team and its hand-selected locale...

Team owner Jed York has poured an astounding and unprecedented $3 million into the upcoming city-council election, backing four candidates and opposing four other candidates — including two female incumbents who have stood up to the 49ers on several issues. It’s a mind-blowing amount of money to infuse into a local race in a city of 130,000 people, and has some worrying that the 49ers are trying to turn the city into “Yorkville.”

(Note: the City of Santa Clara shouldn't be confused with Santa Clara County, which btw is home to prominent cities like Palo Alto, San Jose, and Mountain View.)

California's COVID-19 policies have been among the strictest in the nation, yet Santa Clara is saying that these are not strict enough. The 49ers attendance issue was initially about the tradeoff between health risk and business, but in California it quickly devolved into interest-group and identity politics:

[Mayor Lisa] Gillmor and the council, which is majority female (four council members) want to maintain oversight over the stadium. York’s influx of campaign funds, both for and against candidates of his choosing and which dwarfs the backing of any other funds coming into the race, appears to be an effort to change the dynamic.

The 49ers want to make the race an argument about diversity and describe York’s preferred candidates as an effort toward better representing the makeup of the city (40% of Santa Clara residents identify as white). Three of York’s preferred candidates are Asian American.

Rahul Chandhok, the 49ers’ vice president of public affairs and strategic communications, said in an email that York’s support was a “swift, open and transparent” response to seeing Gillmor “orchestrate her developer allies to funnel money through the Police Union PAC” and to “the outcry from civic institutions like the NAACP and the Asian Law Alliance.” Chandhok charges that Gillmor is “supporting a slate of all white candidates” and has worked to “upend voting rights to dilute minority representation.”

The 49ers are bringing out the big guns by stressing the female majority of the City Council (subtext: women don't care about a sport that men love) coupled with the Council's all-white make-up (bunch of Karens!).

Introduce the sex and race angle, now add in a dollop of negative-association words ("developer", "PAC", "union"), and so it goes in California politics.

For the record your humble blogger is in favor of the 49ers position, but c'mon, man, don't trash city council candidates.

Green Acres is the Place to Be

The Grand-Dewyse family will spend more time in Errancourt
2 hours NE of Paris when the child comes (WSJ photo)

The move out of the cities is occurring worldwide:

Fears of a second wave of infections and the ease of remote working are prompting families with children, pensioners and some young people to question the long-term benefits of city life.

In the U.S., 39% of urban dwellers said the Covid-19 crisis prompted them to consider leaving for less densely populated areas, according to a Harris poll of 2,050 adults conducted in late April.

In France, 38% of potential home buyers widened their searches further from big cities as they sought gardens and an extra room for remote working during the pandemic, according to a survey mid-May by French real-estate portal SeLoger.

In Germany, where economic activity is more spread out across the country, demand for houses in rural areas has risen steadily since lockdowns began in mid-March, according to online real-estate portal ImmoScout24.

Some historians think the urban exodus is short-lived:

Examples from past crises—from the Spanish flu of 1918 to wars in Europe and 9/11 in New York City—show that urban exiles tend to return, researchers say.

Your humble blogger believes that this time is different; the de-population of urban centers won't reverse itself for at least 20 years. As services like fire, education, health, transportation, and police are asked to do more on frozen budgets, businesses and the middle and upper classes flee--not all at once, to be sure--but enough so that the tax base erodes. Services are further reduced, and the flight continues. The admittedly extreme example is Detroit, a once-great American city that has never recovered from the 1967 riots.

We are entering a downward spiral that is extremely difficult to turn around. Almost everyone wants to feel safe where they live, and cities are going in the opposite direction with COVID-19. (Defunding of police forces might be the last straw for many American urban dwellers.)

If you have property in the city, sell it. If you are considering a move into the city, rent, don't buy. Even better, don't do it.

Your Choice: The Dumbest Idea or the Worst Slogan Ever

Willie Brown in SFPD's 2018 lip-sync video

Grey eminence Willie Brown--rich, fashionable, extremely successful as California Speaker and Mayor of San Francisco--doesn't hesitate to call 'em as he sees 'em though it may not be what his Democratic Party colleagues want to hear.

According to Willie Brown there is no way "defund the police" is a winner: [bold added]

The call to “defund the police” as part of the anti-racism, anti-police-brutality movement is either one of the dumbest ideas of all time or the hands-down winner of the worst slogan ever.

...But many defenders of the concept say they don’t really mean defund — they mean reimagine. Take away dealing with homeless people from police, for example, and re-steer the money for that to social services programs.

Fine. Let’s talk about how to do that. But we’re starting from a terrible disadvantage because of that “defund” slogan...

People are legitimately shocked by the police misconduct they see on TV and social media. But everyone still wants the assurance that when they dial 911, a cop is on the way.

You take away people’s feelings of personal safety, and you lose voters.

While I do agree that we should restrict the number of interactions between armed public servants--for example, taking accident reports, clearing homeless encampments, and reporting internet scams may well be offloaded to someone other than the police--asking the public to distinguish types of incidents then calling the right number is too much of a burden. I like the simplicity of "911", which like Google's home page can branch off in a multitude of directions.

Final thought, not original: they meant "defund the police" and tried to retreat to "re-imagine the police" after the outcry. A sensible riposte is why didn't you say "reimagine" in the first place?

They Didn't Think This Through

Washington, DC (abc.net.au)

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser has renamed a street leading to the White House "Black Lives Matter Plaza" and had the slogan painted in huge yellow letters on it.

"Black Lives Matter" murals and street signs are springing up all over.

I wonder if politicians have thought this through. The understanding that overt political messaging is forbidden on public property has been resoundingly overturned by officials who created the well-meaning signage.

Is "Black Lives Matter" spray-painted on a a fire-station wall still a crime? The graffiti artist was just emulating the example of the mayor.

If it isn't a crime, what about painting "All Lives Matter?" Any attempt to criminalize "All Lives Matter" counter-signage will be viewed as more liberal hypocrisy, i.e., free speech for me but not for thee.

People are already resentful of being scolded and even arrested for gathering in crowds while public health officials make an exception for politics they support.

It strains credulity that police defunding, dismantling, and disbanding is seriously being discussed when riots have destroyed city blocks across America.

Like the super-volcano under Yellowstone, I sense an anger building quietly beneath the surface. It will explode in November, and not in the direction that the headline writers hope for.

Concluding note: your humble blogger has long ago ceased to be angry about hypocrisy, injustice, and unfairness. Getting worked up about politics--or anything that I have no control over--is injurious to health.

Once this blows over, and it will in short-attention-span America, I will work toward improving the lives of the less fortunate as I have been doing for a while.

Bottoms Up

Last week Friday, Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta spoke (YouTube video above) about the death of George Floyd. This was before the political battle lines were drawn, talking points were crafted by the various sides, and the essays on America's history of racism and police brutality were updated.

Though unscripted, it struck a thoughtful balance between sorrow and anger both at the murder of an innocent man and the riots that were destroying parts of Atlanta.

Leadership expert Sam Walker breaks down the components of her effective presentation. Excerpts:

1. Ditch the Notes: She never broke eye contact.

2. Lose the Badge: “I am a mother to four black children in America, one of whom is 18 years old. And when I saw the murder of George Floyd, I hurt like a mother would hurt.” This brought her down to eye level with everyone.

3. Show Vulnerability: “I called my son and I said, ‘Where are you?’ ” The fear showed on her face. Her voice quavered as if she might cry. “I said, ‘I cannot protect you. A black boy shouldn’t be out today.’ ”

4. Focus on Behavior: Telling them, “you are disgracing our city,” was quite different from saying “You are a disgrace to our city.”

5. Be Fierce, But Offer Solutions: “You’re not protesting anything, running out with brown liquor in your hands, breaking windows in this city,” she shouted....Here, at the peak of volume, the mayor offered a better solution. “If you want change in America, go and register to vote,” she said. “Show up at the polls on June 9. Do it in November. That is the change we need in this country.”

6. Show Control: Ms. Bottoms made it clear, right away, that she hadn’t shown up in a lather. “Let me just speak to what’s happening here, today,” she calmly began. In the first minute, her pace was slow, controlled and deliberate. Later, after fully unleashing her “red” emotion, the mayor quickly went “blue” again. She fell silent for three full seconds.

7. Reel It Back: Early on, Ms. Bottoms had leaned on two pronouns, “I” and then “you.” As her speech wound down, she added a third. “We are better than this,” she said. “We’re better than this as a city, we are better than this as a country.”...Start with “I,” pivot to “you” and finish with “we.”

Mayor Bottoms is rumored to be on the list of Joe Biden's potential running mates. Can one speech catapult a non-Governor state official to national prominence and, eventually, national office? Why not?

Pentecost, 2020

Red, the liturgical color of Pentecost, doesn't show
as brightly during a streaming church service

It's easy to get riled up, whichever side you're on. If you want to be outraged about racial injustice and police brutality, go for it, you'll be outraged for the rest of your life. If you're angry about the double standard of ordering you to practice social distancing at the beach but not if you're rioting, stop being so deplorable--certain groups are allowed to break windows, but sorry, not yours.

So take a breath, masked or not, and make sure that you tend to yourself, your loved ones, and your property. Then turn on the tube if you must and get riled up by the actions of people who are very likely far, far from your neighborhood.

Speaking of breath, today is Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came to earth and breathed life into the church.

When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.-----Acts 2:1-4

Take This Job and Shovel It

Three Albany, NY, police officers shoveled snow for a 99-year-old woman who called for help:

Helping people is what we do best. When a 99-year-old woman from #Albany called the police asking for assistance with her driveway and sidewalk, police officers from the Center Station drove right over to give her hand. ❄️ pic.twitter.com/UGGdvWWGsf

— Albany Police (@albanypolice) December 2, 2019

It's heartwarming that they cleared her driveway, but what the heck is she doing driving a car....in the snow no less?

San Francisco: the High and the Low

Unfortunately the "high" is nothing to be proud of. Per the San Francisco Chronicle (bold added):

Van window bye-bye (Chronicle)

San Francisco has by far the highest property crime rate in California, with more than twice the number of reported thefts per capita than Los Angeles or Santa Clara counties, according to a new report by the Public Policy Institute of California.

And when it comes to arrests, San Francisco is 50th out of the state’s 58 counties.

Burlingame Apple Store (KTVU)
"Apple workers and security guards
are instructed not to engage"

One likely reason is the passage of Proposition 47, "a voter-approved measure that dropped property crimes of less than $950 in value to a misdemeanor that carries little if any jail time." California released many of its so-called "non-violent" criminals, and the consequences were what any pragmatic person might expect; criminal rings have organized to smash-and-grab cars and retail outlets (Apple Stores, which have desirable products under $1,000, are particularly vulnerable.)

And what do the enlightened progressives who run San Francisco suggest? Here's what the two candidates for San Francisco District 5 Supervisor have to say: [bold added]

[Dean] Preston would take a softer approach: enlisting a “non-police property crimes unit” to patrol the streets, unarmed. And how, we asked, would that stop car break-ins? The patrols would ask the thieves to stop.

[Vallie] Brown noted that many of the break-ins are being conducted by criminal rings. “I wouldn’t have someone say anything to them,” she said.

From one year ago: We keep voting them in, so I guess we're getting the government we deserve.

Easy to Fool

Today I drove a 97-year-old lady to Palo Alto for an outpatient procedure. She has no relatives in the area, and remarkably she lives alone, without assistance, on the second floor in a condominium complex. She didn't want to pay $55 each way for a van service, and, after being contacted by a mutual acquaintance, I didn't have an excuse to say no.

A task for burly men and the right equipment

The afternoon was far from stress-free: 1) traffic on the Bayshore Freeway was moderate, but in Palo Alto it was murder; 2) the maps app kept guiding me to the wrong building; 3) another car scraped ours in a parking lot while we were asking for directions--I'd have let it go but the other was a late model Camry, so we exchanged information by the book; 4) lacking a disability placard, walker, or wheelchair she could barely limp the distance to the front door; 5) the procedure and tests were inconclusive, so she has to return next month after the biopsy results.

Adding to her agitation was that she had locked herself out of her condo. The spare key was with a relative, two hours away. One ray of hope was that her balcony was unlocked.

Maybe I could go home and get a ladder? Nope, just one glimpse showed we needed professional help.

And so it was that I found myself at the Foster City Police Department explaining our predicament. The after-hours dispatcher totally believed me--I wore my most open, trustworthy expression--and a fire truck with three burly men solved the problem in less than 10 minutes by climbing to the balcony and unlocking the front door.

After I walked her safely upstairs, my new friend asked how I could remain calm throughout the afternoon. When one's interlocutor has poor eyesight and hearing, she's easy to fool.

Zero

May, 2019: the Ride of Silence for traffic casualties (Chron)

Perhaps you haven't heard about Vision Zero, San Francisco's 2014 action plan to eliminate traffic deaths by 2024. It's not surprising that there's been little publicity: [bold added]

We’re five years into the 10-year goal. And yet just two-thirds into 2019, 22 people have lost their lives on the city’s streets. That’s one less than died in all of 2018 and two more than died in all of 2017. We’re on pace to surpass the 31 deaths in 2014, the year Vision Zero began....

One major factor is a dramatic drop in tickets issued to drivers by San Francisco police — a neglect that could be explained by too many unfilled vacancies in the department’s traffic division and ever-changing leadership of the crucial unit.

New figures obtained by The Chronicle show the San Francisco Police Department is ticketing far fewer drivers for illegal behavior behind the wheel than it did the year Vision Zero was adopted.

Ticket-writing for the most dangerous driving behaviors has fallen dramatically:

Vision Zero directs the Police Department to focus its enforcement on the five most dangerous driving behaviors: speeding, failing to stop at a red light, failing to stop at a stop sign, failing to give pedestrians the right of way, and failing to yield to pedestrians while turning.

The number of citations for those specific behaviors are also distressingly low. Of all the citations handed out in 2014, 30,613 were for those five violations. While that number climbed at first, it fell off dramatically in 2018. Last year, police officers handed out just 20,154 tickets for those five violations. In the first half of this year, they handed out just 10,267.

That's what one gets when politicians--in fact, any leaders--make big promises and don't put their time and more money behind them: zero.

Smart Government Spending

Old # 26: next door to a neighborhood shopping center

The high cost of housing has caused some Peninsula job holders, even a few who make over $100,000 per year, to live out of their cars.

Related: some who live more than an hour away also sleep overnight in their vehicles on working days; they choose to sacrifice personal hygiene and comfort in favor of more productivity and more sleep. (Gym memberships and/or showers at their workplaces make it a little easier.)

As a small step in alleviating the conditions of police officers who are forced to make this choice, the City of San Mateo is converting a closed fire station into a sleeping barracks. [bold added]

The $520,000 project will provide bunks and showers for up to 12 officers at a time at Fire Station 26 at 1812 S. Norfolk St. In addition to the barracks, the building will be a police substation and vehicle storage site....Of San Mateo’s 125 officers, 68% live outside of San Mateo County, many as far as Tracy or Mountain House in San Joaquin County or Gilroy in south Santa Clara County

Of the officers commuting from other counties, the average distance is 50 miles each way, according to a staff report on the barracks proposal. A San Mateo Police Officers’ Association survey found the average round-trip commute of those traveling from outside the county is two hours and 17 minutes.

The project is relatively cheap at $43,000 per bed because land, the scarce resource, is being provided "free" by San Mateo.

It's easy to deplore the current situation as being caused by government no-development policies and poor planning ("San Mateo County has a population of roughly 750,000, but has about 12 jobs for every one housing unit") but at least the current City leadership is trying to do something positive. And they're doing it at a fraction of the cost of the average middle-class home in San Mateo.