Speculating on effectiveness of the DA and how much crime goes unreported would have to benchmark other cities to be meaningful. We can’t just assume that crime is more frequently reported and prosecuted elsewhere based on a joke headline.
Ironically, SF’s property crime problem is likely heavily impacted by the high demand to live there in the first place and the resulting high cost of housing. SF can alleviate crime by building housing, but I’m not sure how Peoria, IL, Steubenville, OH, or Bridgeport, CT solve their crime and drug issues long term. At least SF has a clear path out.
The law only works as a deterrence for crime when there is a reasonably high chance of being caught, and the consequences work as a significant deterrent. To their credit the San Francisco Police Department have a pretty nice page on this exact issue here. [1] Not so much to their credit, the clearance rate (cases solved) for theft is at 3.4%. Then those get sent over to the DA who may or may not even choose to prosecute it. There's also things like community courts [2] that can help ensure you get the most gentle slap on the wrist if caught.
Pair these systems alongside the surplus of high value targets, and it just seems like you're creating an extremely enticing area for thieves. I also imagine this all has to be extremely demoralizing for police, which one could expect would lead to something of a downward spiral. It's just generally not a great situation.
[1] - https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/stay-safe/crime-data/clea...
[2] - https://www.sfdistrictattorney.org/policy/restorative-justic...
So I think it’s pretty common for property crime to have a low clearance rate especially in larger municipalities.
I think you’re also downplaying the fairness of misdemeanors for property crime under $950. Why should stealing a candy bar or a DVD be a felony? Do you realize how life-ending a felony conviction can be? You basically can’t get a decent quality job ever again, which isn’t going to lower the property crime rate by making desperate people more desperate.
And also, misdemeanors can be upgraded to felonies via repeat offenses and surrounding circumstances (e.g., armed robbery is always felony).
Here’s an example of the San Francisco DA seeking life sentences for violent robberies: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/sf-mission-distric...
I think San Francisco has a perception of being a liberal haven for criminals with lax enforcement, but the more likely reality is that it operates similarly to most other large cities. The DA isn’t twiddling their thumbs and allowing violent robbers to get off with misdemeanors. That perception of San Francisco law enforcement is pushed by political opponents.
You're talking about a city with the 2nd highest theft rate, the overall 4th highest property crime rate, and comparing it against cities that not only have much lower crime rates, but ones where the clearance rate is at least twice as high for the crimes that are committed. Then there are other probable issues, but ones seemingly neither of us has been able to dig up data on, like prosecution rates vs dismissal/reclassification. To claim these differences amount to nothing, or only exist due to bias in others, is just not really reasonable.
You can accept San Francisco having a high crime rate, but think that the other niceties you enjoy about the city more than compensate for it. Every city, every state, every country has its own set of pros and cons. It's only balance that the 'big picture' really comes out, and that's also going to be extremely subjective.
Point is NextDoor can provide some insight into crime as often what is mentioned in that medium is unreported to authorities though often you will have members recommend the victim report the crime to police.
