Keith Rabois and David Sacks and all of the other billionaire VCs who love to whine and complain about SF on twitter are nowhere near the crime (which is totally blown out of proportion). These guys own $20-30MM homes in Pacific Heights which is one of the poshest neighborhoods in the world. They're complaining because they're used to being able to pay for perfection - perfect dinners, perfect vacations, assistants and workers who do exactly as they're told, and SF is frustrating because if you live here you can almost see how it could nearly be the perfect city, but no amount of money can make it perfect - there is no such thing in reality as perfection and these VCs are pissed that they can't throw money at it and make it so.
> If a majority of the votes on a recall proposal are “Yes,” the officer is removed and, if there is a candidate, the candidate who receives the highest number of votes is the successor to the unexpired term of the recalled officer.
(Cal. Const., Art. II, Sec. 15;
Elections Code §§ 11381(c), 11384, 11385)
One of the highest property crime rates in the country is blowing it out of proportion? It's factually, actually, truly a crime ridden shithole; as much of one as a US city can be.
Your source seems to say SF is #37 of 100, when sorted by crime per population.
Large cities with crime rate higher than SF, according to your source: Detroit, Baltimore, Memphis, Indianapolis, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Dallas, Los Angeles, Phoenix.
Your source says St Louis has a crime rate 2.9x higher.
Maybe consider that you just hate SF, for your own personal reasons?
(And your source is based on voluntary reporting, so there's huge biases there. SF sounds like the kind of place that could manage to push for more transparency..)
37 is violent crime. When you sort by property crime, the type of crime I wrote in my post, it is number 4. Maybe consider that you didn't read the source carefully for your own personal reasons?