Finally Rolling Back Prop 47 (Pismo Beach: home, living, law)

[PilgrimsProgress]

It doesn't matter why someone commits a crime. They should be punished. Period.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by PilgrimsProgress

It doesn't matter why someone commits a crime. They should be punished. Period.

And that punishment can come by way of a fine, instead of jail. This mom knows all too well that breaking the law in CA can be very costly. She was fined $88K after her kids picked up clams on Pismo Beach, thinking they were shells. Oh the horror of these lawbreakers!

https://nypost.com/2024/05/23/us-new...ere-seashells/

[kettlepot]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You think addicts and thieves make rational decisions to commit crimes based on their analyses of crime classification thresholds and potential prosecutions… as opposed to: “ … man I got to get me some [whatever] right now! …”

Heh.

This has nothing to do with rational or not rational choices of drug addicts. It's about law enforcement having the ability to compel drug treatment for thieving drug addicts.

A big driver of Prop 47 was to de-socialize the costs of crime (prison), so state money could be diverted from prisons to other state programs. However, that individualized the costs of crime (the individual having to make good their own losses - over and over again, because most thefts are from repeat offenders). You know who has the hardest time restoring lost goods? The poor.

And when people are victimized by crime the response is to blame the victim:

"shouldn't have left something in your car"

"should have installed an alarm system"

"shouldn't be walking back to your apartment alone at night"

However, "don't live in a gated community" and "don't buy a gun"

Perhaps when so much prison time was eliminated, the money saved should have been used to compensate crime victims for their stolen goods, paid out insurance deductibles, and installed new home alarm systems.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by kettlepot

Threat of jail time is the most effective stick to get homeless drug addicts into treatment.
...

Originally Posted by kettlepot

This has nothing to do with rational or not rational choices of drug addicts. It's about law enforcement having the ability to compel drug treatment for thieving drug addicts.

…

Kettle, I responded to your first post as I did because - as my response demonstrated through the link I provided - no, the threat of jail time does not deter crime … nor drive drug-addicted criminals to treatment on their own.

Now I will add that *compelled drug treatment* pretty much never succeeds. You can look that up for yourself. Common knowledge in the field.

And finally, unless you’d like to go further parsing things out: this thread really isn’t about homeless drug addicts. It’s about Prop 47, which vastly exceeds the portion of crime committed by homeless.

[njbiodude]

I’ll be voting to repeal.

Seems like the citizens are wising up.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by kettlepot

It's about law enforcement having the ability to compel drug treatment for thieving drug addicts.

That was not the purpose of Prop 47.

Originally Posted by kettlepot

A big driver of Prop 47 was to de-socialize the costs of crime (prison), so state money could be diverted from prisons to other state programs.

What is the stated purpose of Proposition 47?

The stated purpose of the proposition is to “ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for non-serious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from [the proposition] into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment” and to ensure “that sentences for people convicted of dangerous crimes like rape, murder, and child molestation are not changed.”

https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Prop47FAQs.pdf

[colobound65]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

That was not the purpose of Prop 47.



What is the stated purpose of Proposition 47?

The stated purpose of the proposition is to “ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for non-serious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from [the proposition] into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment” and to ensure “that sentences for people convicted of dangerous crimes like rape, murder, and child molestation are not changed.”

https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Prop47FAQs.pdf

Well that was a total failure. Victim services!?!? What a joke….

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by colobound65

Well that was a total failure. Victim services!?!? What a joke….

How so? From March, 2022:

More than $200 million in Prop 47 savings is set to be allocated to trauma recovery and school-based programs.

While Prop 47 directs 65 percent of state prison savings to BSCC grants, the remaining 35 percent is split
between the California Department of Education to keep vulnerable students in school (25%) and the California Victim Compensation Board to support survivors of crime through trauma-informed treatment services (10%). Through FY 2022-23, Prop 47 allocations to these programs will total more than $200 million.

These investments are already strengthening communities and interrupting cycles of harm. Thus far, Prop
47 savings has supported at least 35 school districts or other local educational agencies across 20 counties as they implement the Learning Communities for School Success Program (CDE, 2017; 2021). This program helps schools reduce truancy and dropout rates by supporting their highest-needs students. Prop 47 has also funded at least 18 Trauma Recovery Centers throughout California (CalVCB, 2018; 2019; 2019a; 2020; 2021; NATRC, 2022). These centers provide vital support to crime survivors, including mental health and case management services.

https://www.cjcj.org/media/import/do...ommunities.pdf

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by colobound65

Well that was a total failure. Victim services!?!? What a joke….

I won't expand on why I feel this way but I agree with you 100%. It is a joke for many.

[mattja]

Originally Posted by JGC97

And that punishment can come by way of a fine, instead of jail. This mom knows all too well that breaking the law in CA can be very costly. She was fined $88K after her kids picked up clams on Pismo Beach, thinking they were shells. Oh the horror of these lawbreakers!

https://nypost.com/2024/05/23/us-new...ere-seashells/

That story is sus. I knew the difference between a living shellfish and the empty shells when I was three. Regardless, the fine was insane. Those crazy fines were put in place in the 1980s in response to Vietnamese and Chinese immigrants raping the coast of abalone, ignoring the laws WRT licensure, size and limits. Then they would plead ignorance of the law or declare "Me no speaky no Engwish."