If you mean "Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming", then that's probably the least bad way to be wrong. Because when you're wrong at least the world will be better off. Like betting against your own team: if they lose you win and if they win you don't mind losing.
In Berkeley, CA they purposefully break up the grid for cars. So a street will be passable to pedestrians and bikes but blocked by bollards for cars. This gives the cul-de-sac effect without causing terrible walkability. Of course, traditional winding suburbs can accomplish something similar by adding pedestrian walkways through cul-de-sacs.
I added the original source so you can explore in more detail. You can see that in previous spikes there was a short delay, but in general they rose in tandem. All evidence points to Omicron as far less lethal than Delta.
The chart towards the bottom of this page [1] provides another source.
Like others my initial reaction was “deaths lag” but upon closer inspection the data is more nuanced: While deaths do lag, in previous waves deaths had risen substantially by the time cases peaked, but with omicron in South Africa cases have already peaked but deaths have barely risen. This could be partly because the omicron wave has peaked faster (~3 weeks) than previous waves (~1 month or more), partly because the population has more immunity, and partly because omicron is less severe?
I’m not sure yet. All in all, I’m optimistic but will wait another week or two to be convinced.
I had to look this up: (1) Boudin (mother) agreed to a plea deal to get the felony murder result, (2) Gilbert (father) was convicted of murder (not felony murder).
This doesn't sound like a very controversial result. What part do you think is controversial?
Chesa Boudin thinks their imprisonment is an indictment of our racist system of mass incarceration.
He ran campaign ads showing that he is qualified to be DA because his experience growing up with incarcerated parents exposed him to the injustice of that system, and hardened his resolve to end it.
San Francisco is a place where a Marxist-Leninist seeking elected office as the top prosecutor thought the most viable strategy for obtaining this position was to highlight how his parents, who are convicted murderers, were the real victims, while never once mentioning those they aided in the murder of.
If a conservative talk radio host had made up such a story five years ago about how extreme the San Francisco electorate is, it would be seen as outlandish even by Republicans.
>(2) Gilbert (father) was convicted of murder (not felony murder)
One or the other of us has got wrong information.
I just double checked and read that he was an "unarmed getaway driver" convicted under NY's felony murder law. If this is wrong, that would be good to know.
One way to solve the problem without expensive social safety nets is to have private stores that only allow entry to members. Maybe stores can band together so that a single membership grants entry to all the stores in a neighborhood. (Another way is delivery/curbside pickup which seems more likely in SF.)
Is that a better social outcome than enforcing these retail theft laws?
I think the general idea is that the thief would have to escalate to physical violence in order to steal the prize. The physical violence escalation would then justify pulling out the pistol and shooting. Roughly the thief would have to escalate to mugging.
Yeah, that just seems crazy. The OP said he wanted to feel like he had the option to escalate, but as far as I’ve seen, it’s typically the act of escalating a situation that harms a self-defense argument.
I mean, maybe you could block a thief’s exit while producing a handgun, and create a standoff until the cops arrived. That still sounds pretty reckless for something like shoplifting; getting into an altercation that results in firing a gun in a store is a risk to everyone in the vicinity. I remember when some woman shot out the tires of somebody trying to steal a ton of stuff from Home Depot—she was arrested. Both the cops and other gun owners thought that was incredibly irresponsible.
I think what you're saying is that the person getting stolen from has a duty to surrender their property to avoid escalating. That sounds absurd to me? The person doing the stealing is the one escalating as the natural state is the original owner keeping possession of their property. "Give me your wallet." "No." -- What happens next and who is the one escalating?
I doubt a thief would stick around for the cops to arrive. And I do think everyone knows you don't pull a gun until you're ready to fire it to neutralize a threat. (A truck is probably not a theat unless it's trying to run you over.)
That’s a mugging you’re describing. There’s an implicit threat of violence in being confronted by someone who demands your property, and drawing a weapon would likely be seen as justified.
Retail theft—someone grabbing stuff and fleeing the store—is a different deal. If you blocked the person from leaving and they threatened you, again, you might be able to justify drawing a weapon. But threatening deadly force against someone who’s running away isn’t the same situation.
As you said, you don’t draw a gun unless you’re willing to use it. If I were a store customer or employee, I’d be more worried about armed hero-types overreacting and possibly killing me, rather than someone stealing stuff and trying to escape.
I agree with this, but the misunderstanding because no one is explicitly talking about how there is a desire to preserve rent controlled units. This means it's very hard for the econ 101 to play out.
Because of the laws around new buildings, rent control advocates have an incentive to prevent old buildings from being redeveloped: if they are redeveloped then there will be fewer rent controlled units! This does regularly play out in the politics of development in the area[0].
Then when rent controlled unit can be redeveloped, there's a desire to allocate various percentages to different income levels. This means that some units have less income for the same cost so it's hard to balance meaning fewer projects get off the ground.
Now there's even further issues about development as a right vs requiring a use permit...
So, there's a lot of contributors, but the political impact of the politics of rent control is significant.
