Powered by Topple

San Fran to start paying known criminals monthly stipend to stop killing, eligible for bonuses

Powered by Topple

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE


CHECK OUT WeThePeople.store for best SWAG!

One of America’s “wokest” cities, San Francisco, intends to start paying high-risk criminals to not shoot each other.

Starting in October, 10 known criminals will receive a $300 stipend every month that they abstain from busting some caps.

The chosen criminals will also be eligible for a $200/month bonus if they meet certain milestones like obtaining a job.

“The idea is to provide the small number of San Franciscans who authorities believe are most at risk of shooting someone — or being shot — with an incentive to get help and stay out of trouble,” according to the San Francisco Examiner.

“The initiative will pair participants with newly hired life coaches from the Street Violence Intervention Program, known as SVIP, who will help them make the right choices and access services. The theory is that the up to $500 stipend will serve as an incentive to participate — and stay engaged,” the paper notes.

Far-left Mayor London Breed is a huge fan.

“My desire is to get to them, not to just make an arrest, but to get to them and to try and figure out if they would be willing to work with us on something that is an alternative,” she reportedly said at a recent violence prevention summit.

“We can’t just put them in a program without making sure that they have money, without making sure that they have something to take care of themselves,” she added.

In an interview this week with local station KPIX, she further argued that they’re trying to “make sure that money is not a barrier to turning your life around.”

The program, called the Dream Keeper Fellowship, was reportedly rolled out by the San Francisco Human Rights Commission and the San Francisco Office of Economic and Workforce Development.

Here’s the kicker: It’s being funded by money that was diverted from law enforcement, meaning it’s being funded by “defund the police” money.

But Sheryl Davis, the executive director of the Human Rights Commission, claims it’s not what it looks like.

“It’s not necessarily as cut and dry as folks may think. It’s not as transactional as, ‘Here’s a few dollars so that you don’t do something bad,’ but it really is about how you help us improve public safety in the neighborhood. As you become better, your community benefits from that,” she told Fox News.

Yet it’s not clear how it’ll benefit regular, law-abiding citizens when their money — money that, to be clear, could potentially be used to solve their own problems — is funneled into the hands of known criminals.

According to former NYPD lieutenant and current Pace University criminal justice professor Dr. Darrin Porcher, the idea itself is “absolutely absurd.”

“This is a classic example of Democrats focusing on entitlement spending as opposed to a practitioner-based model. We need to implement something we refer to as precision policing,” he said during an appearance Thursday on Fox Business Network’s “Mornings with Maria.”

“Precision policing is a deployment of officers in areas where you have the highest concentration of crime. That’s how you fix the problem, not entitlement spending. And this is a clear example of the catastrophic failures in the city of San Francisco,” he added.

Listen:

Indeed, the Bay Area has become a heavy crime zone beset by frequent shootings, robberies, rapes, you name it, in large part because the city’s leaders keep coddling the city’s criminals.

Last year, for instance, district attorney Chesa Boudin let loose a longtime criminal as part of some “deal.”

“Last year, a career criminal named Troy McAlister faced a well-deserved life sentence as a result of California’s three-strikes law. His long and violent rap sheet included multiple robberies, thefts, and an attempted carjacking,” Sen. Tom Cotton explained in a recent op-ed for National Review.

“Instead of permanently taking this criminal off the streets, Chesa Boudin cut a deal with McAlister that resulted in his release. McAlister went on to commit a series of crimes leading to three separate arrests. Boudin refused to charge him each time,” he added.

Months later on New Year’s Eve, McAlister ran over two women while fleeing from a robbery in a stolen vehicle. Those two women later died.

The same phenomenon has played out in New York City, according to fill-in Fox Business Network host Dagen McDowell.

“You saw it here in New York City: There’s a lack of prosecutions of violent felons with bail reform. You can commit an act of violence — punch somebody in the face, break their nose — and not have to post bail, and be right back out on the streets,” she noted to Porcher.

One would think that, after so many incidents like the one involving McAlister, political leaders in San Francisco would take a hint and stop coddling criminals and start sticking it to them, but apparently not.

“They just don’t get it in San Francisco,” Porcher bluntly stated.

Nor in NYC, where a city council candidate has proposed forcing crime victims to help rehabilitate their assailants. The plan would further get rid of “policing and prisons.” No joke.

“Example of Use: A person is beat up, suffers a broken rib, and is robbed of his wallet. First, his needs are heard and affirmed, and he works with trained staff to develop a services and healing plan,” the proposal reads.

“Then, when he is ready, he participates in restorative justice circles with the person who harmed him and their respective support systems. He asks questions and gets answers, and they develop an accountability and consequences plan.”

Meanwhile, the perpetrator would remain free the whole time.

Like Porcher pointed out, these people “just don’t get it.”

Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles