Let's discuss this on the oakland subreddit (where all discussion of crime is verboten, because if you're not allowed to talk about it, it isn't happening.)
National Review has no place on this site, or anywhere really. Now, if you want to post a study on crime with actual crime data, feel free. That you have to go to some partisan website to support your priors should be your first clue.
Let's not immediately begin a conversation by saying that you only want to talk about what is happening and some folks elsewhere are limiting your speech? Does everything need to start with posturing about your position in greater the "culture war".
If you want to discuss whether crime in Oakland is bad enough to force some businesses out, let's do it without all the social artifice.
I'll start; the way I see it, this at least a somewhat verifiable claim. Has in-n-out provided any data about how much worse things have gotten? Has anyone claiming that it isn't crime but rather changing customer sentiment provided any data to the opposite? Like, what do we know for sure that isn't "my cousin john say his car was broken into way more" / "people are begin silly that place is completely safe".
7 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 22.7 ms ] threadBut what if you just want to discuss, like you're in a pub?
If you want to discuss whether crime in Oakland is bad enough to force some businesses out, let's do it without all the social artifice.
I'll start; the way I see it, this at least a somewhat verifiable claim. Has in-n-out provided any data about how much worse things have gotten? Has anyone claiming that it isn't crime but rather changing customer sentiment provided any data to the opposite? Like, what do we know for sure that isn't "my cousin john say his car was broken into way more" / "people are begin silly that place is completely safe".