Donate
Email Password
Not a member? Sign Up   Forgot password?
Business and Economics Education Environment Health Care California
Home
About PRI
My PRI
Contact
Search
Policy Research Areas
Events
Publications
Press Room
PRI Blog
Jobs Internships
Scholars
Staff
Book Store
Policy Cast
Upcoming Events
WSJ's Stephen Moore Book Signing Luncheon-Rescheduled for December 17
12.17.2012 12:00:00 PM
Who's the Fairest of Them All?: The Truth About Opportunity, ... 
More

Recent Events
Victor Davis Hanson Orange County Luncheon December 5, 2012
12.5.2012 12:00:00 PM

Post Election: A Roadmap for America's Future

 More

Post Election Analysis with George F. Will & Special Award Presentation to Sal Khan of the Khan Academy
11.9.2012 6:00:00 PM

Pacific Research Institute Annual Gala Dinner

 More

Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts
10.19.2012 5:00:00 PM
Author Book Signing and Reception with U.S. Supreme Court Justice ... More

Opinion Journal Federation
Town Hall silver partner
Lawsuit abuse victims project
Press Archive
E-mail Print San Francisco Police Department’s Non-Response To Crime
KQED Commentary
By: Lance T. Izumi, J.D.
6.28.2002

KQED logo

by Lance T. Izumi, Fellow in California Studies
Pacific Research Institute
June 28, 2002


Announcer lead: Time for Perspectives. Lance Izumi says that San Francisco residents deserve better police protection.

The most basic duty of government is to ensure the physical safety of the public. When people pay taxes, they rightfully expect that if they have to call the police, the police will respond. Unfortunately, government in San Francisco has failed to meet even this minimal expectation.

Recent articles in the San Francisco Chronicle have detailed the non-responsiveness of the San Francisco Police Department to the needs of residents. Not only do the police solve very few violent crime cases, 70 percent of robberies and assaults are not even investigated. And if the offense is a property crime, don’t even bother calling the cops.

This past week, the Chronicle reported that a North Beach man had to arm himself with a stun gun to catch a thief who had stolen his credit cards because San Francisco police failed to respond to his repeated pleas for assistance. No officers could be spared for any crime that wasn’t life threatening. After the man apprehended the thief, who had agreed to meet him at a location in the city, a San Francisco police official had the audacity to say that the public shouldn’t make arrests, because “That’s our job.” Well, if the police were doing their job in the first place there would be no need for vigilantism.

San Francisco police and city leaders should learn a few lessons from New York. Rudolf Giuliani became famous way before 9/11 because of his success in battling crime. He believed that allowing minor crimes to fester uncontrolled led to increases in serious crime. He and his police commissioners focused on low-level street crime that up to that time New York police were supposedly too busy to address. The end result was a dramatic fall in violent crime and crime in general. Giuliani’s successor Michael Bloomberg has just announced a plan called Operation Spotlight that continues the focus on petty criminals.

San Francisco needs more aggressive policing of all crimes. Law-abiding residents have a right to be protected, and city officials must show leadership in order to make this right a reality.

With a perspective, I’m Lance Izumi.


Lance Izumi is the Director of Center for School Reform at the California-based Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached via email at lizumi@pacificresearch.org.

Submit to: 
Submit to: Digg Submit to: Del.icio.us Submit to: Facebook Submit to: StumbleUpon Submit to: Newsvine Submit to: Reddit
Within Press
Browse by
Recent Publications
Press Archive
Powered by eResources