California's Prop 47 leads to rise in
shoplifting, thefts, criminal activity
across state
Fox News,
by
Barnini Chakraborty
Original Article
Posted By: DVC,
11/1/2019 1:05:03 PM
In a lighted garage on one of San Francisco's busiest streets, a young man in baggy trousers and messy brown hair pulled down his pants. He had been hiding two pairs of stolen jeans with the tags still on them. He handed them to another man waiting nearby, took some money, pulled up his pants and headed back into another store on Market Street — home to the city's high-end designers and big-chain retail shops.
The incident wasn't a one-off. These brazen acts of petty theft and shoplifting are a dangerous and all-too-common consequence of Proposition 47, a referendum passed five years ago that critics say effectively gives shoplifters
Reply 1 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 11/1/2019 1:13:23 PM (No. 224183)
California legalized crime. California doesn't have a government running the state. It has a criminal gang running the state. Just another example of California going BACKWARDS.
18 people like this.
The unintended consequences of liberalism strike again.
11 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
jimincalif 11/1/2019 1:21:59 PM (No. 224195)
Yep. I was in my local CVS a couple of weeks ago, at the counter paying for my purchase. Someone walked out the door setting off the shoplifting alarm, the cashier just shrugged. Happens all the time and nothing is done about it. Not sure why they even have the alarm equipment anymore.
14 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Nevadadad46 11/1/2019 2:49:00 PM (No. 224266)
All I can say is: Git while the gittin' is good!
5 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
earlybird 11/1/2019 3:05:51 PM (No. 224281)
Stores have long been loath to chase down shoplifters - for the protection of their own employees. The shoplifter actually has to go outside the store with the merchandise before they can be apprehended and arrested. As long as they are in the store, they are always able to pay for the goods.
The most elegant florist-gift shop in Pasadena once explained to me that they “shadow” anyone who looks iffy. An employee pleasantly attaches himself to the person until the person leaves.
In our local Vons market, I saw a young man in the pharmacy shelves, obviously up to something and then he hurried out. I told a store supervisor standing by. He said they don’t chase them as they could be armed and they don’t want an employee to be harmed.
At Macy’s in Pasadena years ago I noticed a young man in the Men’s Department, with a gym bag, who looked very suspicious. I let the sales person know. They said nothing. Whether they called store security or not, I don’t know. I do know that, after several very large lifts of cashmere sweaters displayed on tables too near a main exit, grabbed and hustled out to a waiting getaway car, the store moved them further back into the store, nearer cash registers…
My point is that apprehending the perps in the first place is not as easy as one would think.
I never vote for any of the propositions. But the rationale was this - FTA:
The idea behind it was to reduce certain non-violent felonies to misdemeanors in order to free up resources for cops and prosecutors to focus on violent offenders.
Arresting, charging and prosecuting a person who has stolen a $10 or $20 item (a misdemeanor) is just as time-consuming for law enforcement as for a $950 (felony) item. The choice was left up to the voters.
4 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
earlybird 11/1/2019 3:19:28 PM (No. 224298)
Kansas has a higher shoplifting/theft limit within which such a crime is a misdemeanor - $1000 as opposed to California’s $950. Interesting read about that state’s policy on shoplifting and theft:
FTA:
Are People Who Are Charged with Theft Always Arrested?
Not all people who are charged with theft get arrested. With most shoplifting cases, an individual will not be arrested after they commit a theft. There are exceptions, but most individuals caught shoplifting will be given a ticket or a summons to go to court on a given day. Usually that is the case if it is a first-time offense, and if the person lives or resides in Kansas. Unfortunately, if you have been caught shoplifting and you are from out of state, they will generally make an arrest and make you post bond.
Are There Different Levels Of Charges Within Shoplifting Cases?
Shoplifting cases in Kansas can result in different levels of charges depending on the severity of the theft. Severity is dictated by the value, or dollar amount, of property that has been stolen. If the total amount of property stolen is valued at less than $1,000, the charge is a misdemeanor theft, which is Class A misdemeanor. It is the most severe misdemeanor you can get in Kansas, whether the item was $50 or $1000 the law looks at the defendant the same. If the value of stolen property exceeds $1,000, but is less than $25,000 dollars, then the penalties are more severe, and an individual may be charged with a level 9 felony.
https://www.copleyroth.com/criminal-defense/how-is-theft-defined-in-the-state-of-kansas/
So they can take $50 more in Kansas and still stay within misdemeanor territory, where they may get a citation. If caught. I am not a Kansan, but it’s my educated guess that police in Kansas are not apt to pursue a $25 or $50 shoplifter to even issue a citation. I chose to check out Kansas because it is considered by many to be much different from California.
2 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
DVC 11/1/2019 3:25:16 PM (No. 224302)
Except, #5, do they really even deal seriously with violent offenders any more?
If they are illegals, apparently the governor pardons them, if they 'merely' stole a gun and fired it randomly at Fisherman's Wharf and killed some random young lady, no harm no foul, not his fault, and just because he was in prison and deported five times as a criminal illegal alien.....why should that matter?
Sorry, excuses to let people break "little laws" are excuses, leads to anarchy which Cali seems right on the edge of. And it is easy to stop shoplifters, but it is not free. You need to hire a physically large, strong male "loss prevention officer" and let him do what is necessary to stop the shoplifter and then prosecute each one, regardless of how small the theft. I can see giving idiot kids a break on small items, perhaps.
Letting adults do $900 "small crimes" without legal consequences is well down the slippery slope to anarchy.
6 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 11/1/2019 3:30:28 PM (No. 224306)
Interesting that you would pick Kansas.
My retired police officer neighbor worked 'loss prevention' for several stores for years. They did prosecute all cases which, in his judgement, were not 'kids being stupid', but adults being thieves. I haven't discussed it with him in years, but I do know that it WAS an issue that his store was willing to persue, as was the local city attorney.
3 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
DVC 11/1/2019 3:32:17 PM (No. 224312)
A misdemeanor, pursued and punished is appropriate for under $1,000.
But no pursuit and no punishment ever, for misdemeanor theft is not appropriate.
4 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
skacmar 11/1/2019 4:37:31 PM (No. 224369)
Another example of California's spiral downward towards third world status. A rich state totally destroyed by crazy liberal government and ideology. Watch our USA, this is what the Democrats and liberals have planned for the rest of the country if they get their way!
7 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
watashiyo 11/1/2019 11:19:20 PM (No. 224729)
Lawmakers legalized $950.00 worth of shoplifting. Charge those amounts of stolen goods to the City and County Pension Fund. See how quickly they'll change the law to its normal common-sense standard.
6 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "DVC"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
LOL! You can't make up stuff crazier than what California actually does.
Once again, California's insane, "we must not enforce the laws" folks make another ratchet step towards third world anarchy, increasing the prices they pay for goods, and probably driving away many stores for good.
And "the people of California" (and a lot of illegally present citizens of Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, China, and many other countries) VOTED for this.