A 30-year-old man was doing some art work at 20th and Folsom streets Tuesday at 7:42 p.m. when a suspect approached him with a semi-automatic weapon.
Give me all your stuff, the suspect demanded, according to the police report.
The artist complied, handing over his smart phone, his notebook and a camera.
The suspect fled on foot.
Earlier in the evening, three men approached a 33-year-old man talking on his cell phone as he walked near 26th and York streets. The suspects told him to get down on the ground and put an unknown object to his head, according to the police report.
They took his smart phone and black jacket and fled.
No arrests have been made.
The District Attorney’s office has a resource page for victims of crime.
“A semi-automatic weapon”… Woah, that’s so descriptive. You mean a weapon that can fire only one round when the trigger is squeezed, and chambers another round for you automatically for your next shot so you don’t have to cock the gun again? You mean like any of the most common handguns or rifles in the country?
I find it interesting that more detail is given about the weapon, than the suspect. How exactly is it known that the weapon was a semi-automatic? Why exactly is this fact newsworthy? 99% of all gun crime reported here likely has a semi automatic weapon involved. It’s kind of like saying “bank robbery using a car”. Way to use a recently demonized buzzword for a headline. Journalism fail.
Yeah I agree. Something tells me the guy writing this stuff either pulled this “semi-automatic” crap from another source or he just doesn’t know anything about firearms. Sometimes liberals confuse “semi-automatic” with “fully automatic” so whenever they see a gun that looks like it’s capable of fully automatic fire, they call it “semi automatic”. This would include any non-semi-automatic firearms that resemble a military weapon or just have a “tacticool” appearance to them (i.e. a RIS, and/or some attachments).
It’s not “racist” to point out differing correlations with criminal behavior between races.
The original question asked was why there was no description provided about the criminal here. If one is not provided, most people will infer that the crime was committed by the group of people who have the highest propensity towards crime and, currently, that is young black males.
And all the political correctness in the world can disguise that statistical fact.
“It’s not “racist” to point out differing correlations with criminal behavior between races.”
Yes, it is ABSOLUTELY racist to do so. Especially in this context, when no ethnicity has been indicated in the report.
“most people will infer that the crime was committed by the group of people who have the highest propensity towards crime and, currently, that is young black males.”
No, just most racists. Are you for real? Listen to your language: “the crime was committed by the group of people who have the highest propensity towards crime”. The GROUP of people? So now you are saying that all”young black males” AS A GROUP are criminals. WOW.
Spades, even the black community admits that they have a crime problem.
But somehow you know better?
The PC mob always refuse to admit that blacks and hispanics commit far more crimes than whites and asians. They know it’s true, of course, but they dare not say so.
Some of us can tell the truth, however, and the problem of crime will not be fixed until the problem is admitted.
@”John”
It seems you are confusing ethnic status with economic status.
From your initial passive-aggressive comment, to your final grand manifesto, your words speak volumes about your agenda of hate. Let them stand here forever.
Wrong yet again, Spades. I neither said nor meant economic status.
Now it is entirely possible that there are some correlations between crime and economic status. Crime can correlate to multiple factors and drivers.
But we were talking about a description of the crook here, and economic status isn’t something that can be reliably observed in the same way as race, gender, age, height, weight, clothing, hair type and color, and so on.
No description of these d the dirtbags; enough of the pc bull. District 9 Supervisor Campos again being very quiet about the daily crime.What is he doing to rid the district of the trash?
Pamela – “enough of the pc bull”?
How about enough of the racist bull? Why are you afraid to say what you really mean? Because you are a racist coward. Asking for a description of their height, clothing, hair length, etc would not be a “pc” issue, so it is obvious that all you are interested in is ethnicity. Shame on you! If there is a hell, you will find yourself there some day.
Pamela Del Rio again with the Trash calling, Why dont you pick up the feces your dogs leave all over Garfield Park while you are doing your dog walking job or the trash around you house at 2854 Harrison. Talking about Trash!
Spades, are you seriously suggesting that there is zero correlation between street crime and ethnicity?
So a violent mugger is as likely to be an old white female as, say, a young black male?
Really?
First of all, I’m not the one “suggesting” things here. Second, how does “likelihood” have any bearing on the *actual* suspects in this particular event? Third, neither of the two examples you give would get us any closer to identifying the suspects. Are you going to suspect all “old white females”?
Fourth, you’ve made it clear that you have already made your mind up, so why are you on here spreading your racist propaganda? Oh yeah, to spread your racist propaganda…
Spades, is it “racist” to state that most banking fraud is conducted by whites?
I just don’t go out too late, carry mace, and never use my cell phone in public. EFFF these gangbangers!!!
This happened during the day.
And no descriptions provided.
Please tell us how a description is going to help you catch these criminals. Oh yeah – you’re just interested in the color of their skin, so that you can make sweeping statements about large groups of the population. SHort of surveillance footage, mug shots, or and police artist’s sketch, “descriptions” are pretty much worthless (unless the suspect has some really unique traits, such as one leg, 8 feet tall, etc.
Descriptions are useless?
So a black male, 6 foot, in his twenties, with dark glasses and a beard, wearing a black hoodie, blue jeans and nike sneakers (if that’s the case) is unhelpful?
Spades isn’t saying that descriptions are useless to everybody. He’s pointing out that they wouldn’t be useful for the readers of this blog who aren’t involved in law enforcement (most of us). Would you go out and scour the streets for these individuals if the report gave a basic description of the suspects? Since I’m fairly certain that you’re not a police officer, it’s very unlikely that you would attempt such a thing.
Usually if there’s surveillance footage or a mug shot available, SFPD will share this with the general public. That’s led to several arrests this year. Simply listing the suspect’s skin color as part of a basic description in a crime report on a blog isn’t appropriate however. It inflames racial tensions and invites generalizations about crime statistics from people who really aren’t qualified to comment authoritatively on such matters.
There is nothing racist in any of my remarks. I was simply arguing for consistency in reporting the race of someone.
Either always report race or never report it. But the PC mob do not want that. They endlessly crow about WHITE bankers or politicians doing bad things.Or about BLACKS doing good works. But then when a black commits a crime, we must never mention that he is black.
Why? Justify that, if you can. I do not believe that you can.
Half of all murders in the US are committed by blacks, who are just 12% of the population. Even the black community accepts that as a problem, not least because most of their victims are black as well.
So why won’t a white liberal like you?
Nothing unfounded about my statement. I base it on your comments including this most recent one: “It’s the asymmetry that bothers a lot of us i.e. an undue emphasis on blacks doing well and whites doing badly, out of the worry that we cannot possibly have somebody, somewhere, ever being offended.”
Now that I called you out on your white supremacy, you are claiming that I offended you. Boo f’in hoo.
Some self reflection as you walk to the dry cleaners to pick up your hood would do you some good. At minimum, the time you spend during your walk will serve the rest of us well if it keeps you off these comment pages that you seek to dominate.
So, “disgusted”, when you cannot refute some well-argued and articulated points that are on topic, you respond with a one line unfounded personal attack?
Is that the model you wish to see for debate here?
John is a white supremacist masquerading as a verbose, rambling website commenter.
Z, I see what you are saying but it’s also a problem if race is deliberately left out as well, because that can appear prejudicial or like pandering.
Or worse, the race is left out only if the perp is black or hispanic.
More generally, when you read a newspaper article about almost any person, it is typical to identify things about them. For instance, age is often reported even though it may not be material to the story, because people just like to know the age of someone of interest.
Gender is another fairly important piece of information. And so on. So the real question here is whether race is such a delicate and sensitive classification that we should go out of our way to not mention it.
Personally I do not think so because it leads to the sloppiest kind of political correctness i.e. that it’s OK to mention someone’s race if it’s about a good thing, e.g. some achievement or honor, but then it’s not OK to mention race if it’s about a bad thing, e.g. committing a crime.
It’s the asymmetry that bothers a lot of us i.e. an undue emphasis on blacks doing well and whites doing badly, out of the worry that we cannot possibly have somebody, somewhere, ever being offended.
You are correct that I am not going to scour the streets looking for people who match any published description of a suspect. But it might be handy to know that a significant percentage of street crime is committed by people who look like X, Y and Z. I can then be more wary around such people, whatever that classification is.
If 90% of street crimes in the mission are being conducted by white women in their 60’s, then I’d like to know that.
Nice try. Your comment below confirms the obvious: you are only obsessed with ethnicity.
Spades, you do not win debates by simply saying that you do.
Unless you are arguing that the criminal profile of every class of people is identical, then you have not yet made a point worth countering.
Ask any cop, sheriff or judge whether he sees equal numbers of each race and you will get your answer and refutation.
@”John”
No amount of back-peddling will absolve you from your statement:
“Spades, are you seriously suggesting that there is zero correlation between street crime and ethnicity?”
And you have already read my reply to that statement (below), and clearly have no recourse.
Not at all, because I also noted that criminals are also more likely to be young and male.
I was simply refuting your premise that descriptions are useless. They are, in fact, very helpful, which is why the police always ask for age, race, gender, height, weight, distinguishing features etc.