By the way, wrong guess, I wasn’t Godelian.
All insults/jokes aside.
futureone you need some support as you obviously are struggling with depression.
Forum interaction is only exacerbating whatever it is you are struggling with.
This is not a realistic solution.
Seeing you have intense feelings of hatred towards me these will be the last words I offer.
I wish you well.
1 Like
I’m objective, I never said you were ban/warn worthy of the mods did i, I said only other people who weren’t playing fair. And I don’t hate you anymore either.
2 Likes
Two replies hidden. I assume that’s RealUn/Godelian. Is that against forum rules, to continuously assault someone with their extrement after you have told them they are on ignore and to cease and desist?
She flees here, from her busted UK censored “Philosophy” forum, and immediately believes she dictates the rules and can censor whomever she wished…
The gall of (((these))) types.
To repeat a second time, I wasn’t ‘Godelian’ too, her accusation is false.
1 Like
Godelian still trying to get my attention. Pathetic. Poor thing seems to be terribly confused by me. He can’t understand why I’m not celebrating the murder of a young mother because of her alleged politics.
Goddy still begging for my attention. Sad.
The only ones “celebrating death” were the ones who killed Charlie Kirk. Nobody is going to revolt over a deranged woman, intentionally blocking traffick to provoke Federal Agents, and running them down with her car.
Just projections and straw men from the Left.
.
Taking up Anothers’ divisive agenda is playing with fire.
Between the Muslims and the Globalists, no-one has the West’s best interests at heart.
2 Likes
This is too true and inacceptable:
1 Like
.
Have you ever thought that these people -whether citizens or not- commit atrocious crimes -whether they are young or pretty or not?
..and we wonder why crime, in the gullible/naive West, is at an all-time high. 
No widely accepted theory in the West explains why crime is at an all-time high. This is because crime rates in the United States, particularly violent crimes such as homicide, have declined sharply since their 2020 peaks and reached some of the lowest levels in decades by mid-2025.
Nor can you claim that crime is at an all-time high in Europe or the UK, because overall crime rates remain well below the historical peaks of the 1990s. However, specific categories such as fraud, shoplifting and gun violence in certain cities have recently increased.
I looked into it. In the UK, police-recorded homicides fell by 6% to 535 in the year ending March 2025, which is similar to a decade ago. Meanwhile, theft offences remained stable at 1.8 million, but shoplifting surged by 20% to reach record highs not seen since 2003.
The Crime Survey for England and Wales shows that headline crime has increased by 7% to 9.4 million incidents (driven by a 31% increase in fraud), yet this figure is still 16% below that of 2015 and far below the peaks of the 1990s.
Offences involving knives rose by 2%, but offences involving firearms dropped by 20%. Overall rates (89.7 per 1,000 people in England and Wales) exceed those in Scotland and Northern Ireland, but do not approach historical highs.
In the EU, intentional homicides increased by 1.5% to 3,930 in 2023, with rises in countries such as Germany and France. However, rates vary widely and do not approach all-time highs.
Numbeo indices for 2025 rank France highest (55.4), followed by the UK (48.3) and Sweden (48.0). However, the safest nations, such as Slovenia (23.8) and Denmark (26.0), pull the averages down, and violent crime is stable or in decline in the long term.
Localised spikes do occur, such as the gang shootings in Sweden (113 incidents and 33 deaths in early 2025), or the drug mafia violence in Marseille, but continent-wide trends show no unprecedented surge.
There is no unified Western theory that can explain an “all-time high” that does not exist. Rises in fraud and shoplifting can be tied to digital and economic shifts, while urban gun violence is linked to organised crime and migration in hotspots. Long-term declines (e.g. criminal damage being 82% below 1995 peaks) are reflected in better policing, demographics and prosperity, according to official data.
Blatant Leftist falsehoods and lies, as per usual.
Leftists skew crime statistics in Leftist strongholds as follows:
- they list Hispanic and ‘brown’ criminals as White to fudge the racial statistics.
- they stop reporting or police responses to misdemeanor offenses altogether.
2b. unless a violent assault is IN PROGRESS, and blood is seen, you’ll be lucky if a police officer responds at all within 30min-1hour in a Democrat run SHIT HOLE. TURD WORLD country. - these leftists, @Bob @Peter_Kropotkin @Carleas Etc. all deny the fent-meth homeless epidemic all along the West Coast for decades now. I can post footage after footage, proof after proof, evidence after evidence, they all turn their blind eye to it. Stick their heads in the sand.
In the 90s, the West Coast was an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT environment, high-trust, low crime, beautiful and healthy people. That is NOT the case anymore. It has become a low-trust society, turd-world.
1 Like
Hmm, this seems correct. However, what is your opinion of this chart?
Are they making fake charts now?
I’m having difficulty finding charts that aren’t clipped, most do not extend all the way to 2025, which is annoying AF.
They don’t report petty crimes on the West Coast anymore, they changed procedure about 10 years ago:
.
Google “Shoplifting in San Francisco” and you will find more than 100,000 hits. And you will find lots of YouTube videos, where you can watch a single thief, or an entire gang, walk into an SF Walgreens or CVS and empty the shelves. Most walk in, go about their pilfering, and then walk out, though at least one thief rode their bike into the store and departed the same way, carefully navigating their two-wheeler down a narrow aisle.
We probably shouldn’t call it shoplifting anymore, since that term connotes the idea of a person trying to conceal their crime. In San Francisco, there is no attempt to conceal theft, and there is almost never any effort by store employees, including security personnel, to confront the thieves. The most they do is record the thefts with their cell phones.
Why is shoplifting so rampant? Because state law holds that stealing merchandise worth $950 or less is just a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement probably won’t bother to investigate, and if they do, prosecutors will let it go.
Why won’t store employees do anything about this theft? Because they don’t want to take the risk. I doubt many would, knowing that a Rite Aid employee was murdered recently after trying to stop two thieves. Moreover, a confrontation within the store risks harming not only store staff but also customers, so employees are almost certainly instructed by their managers to do nothing.
Because of this law, California is extending an open invitation to anyone to walk in and take. Just like that—since they know that police or prosecutors won’t bother with a misdemeanor complaint and that store personnel won’t stop them.
It is not just pharmacies that are being ransacked. Recently, San Francisco’s Neiman Marcus was targeted by thieves who had a hankering for designer handbags and hit the purse department hard. The video shows one after another, after another, running out, as apparently there were 10 thieves, and they stole over the $950-per-thief misdemeanor limit.
This video gives a whole new meaning to the term “curbside pickup,” which is the door that the thieves departed from before they jumped into getaway vehicles. And if you are one of those who identify Neiman Marcus with “Needless Markup,” well, now you know: those markups help cover the cost of theft insurance and stolen merchandise, costs that are passed on to those who choose to acquire merchandise the old-fashioned way—by paying for it.
Governor Newsom recently signed a new law in which shoplifting is a felony, even if it is below the $950 limit, if—and this is a big “if”—the theft is part of an organized ring with the intent to sell the stolen goods. Sadly, this may have little effect on shoplifting, given that most of these thefts are by individuals, rather than groups, and it will still be up to police and prosecutors to charge these as felonies. What is needed is a change to the state law that makes shoplifting at a much lower dollar level a felony, to provide adequate incentives to individuals not to commit these crimes.
Unfortunately, it is not just shoplifting in San Francisco that is getting headlines, though San Francisco’s out-of-control drug problem makes this issue much worse than it otherwise would be.
Crime is rising almost everywhere in California, including violent crime. Homicides in California jumped 31 percent last year, making 2020 the deadliest year since 2007. The 2,202 homicides in 2020 represent an increase of 523 over 2019. Homicides in Los Angeles rose 40 percent to 332, and they rose 35 percent to 285 in San Francisco. Both San Francisco and Los Angeles feature district attorneys who are perceived to be soft on crime, and both are facing the possibility of a recall election. Gives a whole new take on defunding police, doesn’t it?
These increases put the spotlight on California’s recent legal change that provides shorter sentences for prisoners, including violent felons, largely because of budgetary issues (California prison costs are among the highest in the country at $81,000 annually per prisoner), and also on Newsom’s decision to suspend the state’s death penalty law via executive order.
California will allow 63,000 prisoners, out of a population of 115,000, the possibility of early release. This includes death row inmate Richard Allen Davis, one of 737 murderers in the system, who was a released felon when he murdered Polly Klaas in 1993. Polly’s father, Marc, who supports recalling Newsom, remarked, “The thing that really alarms me about what the governor did, is that it’s a continuation of policies to undermine the criminal justice system, and to put dangerous people back out onto the streets.”
Just a few hours after Marc Klaas’s remarks, Newsom’s office announced a press conference “on state action to address crime and reduce retail theft in communities across California.”
Sadly, this is Gavin Newsom. Creating a political moment to sign an almost meaningless shoplifting crime bill that rarely will be enforced. Defensively reacting to criticism and doing whatever it takes to deflect that criticism. Failing to lead. A governor of a state of nearly forty million, without a realistic vision to grow a better future.
I sincerely had hoped for Newsom’s success, because millions of Californians are struggling, and mightily so. California could be so much better than it is with sensible policy changes that reduce business costs, reduce housing costs, provide reliable water during drought years, prevent wildfires, and . . . reduce crime.
As the governor recall election looms just over a month away, Governor Newsom remains defensive and reactive and fails to provide a vision that Californians can buy into. Despite being the bluest state in the country, only 48 percent of Californians want to retain Newsom as governor. And if you need a one-liner for why Newsom is not the person to govern California, Newsom had this to say about the recall: “We’re going [to] defeat this partisan effort, and we’re going to work hard to do the work people sent us here to do. If we continue to do that good work, I think we’re going to be OK on Election Day.”
“Partisan effort”? Less than half the state supports him. “Do that good work.” If the good work had been done, there would be no recall. “I think we’re going to be OK on Election Day.” Sounds like a well-intentioned man who still wants the job but is having second thoughts about whether he believes in himself.
California could be so much more.
1 Like
Back on topic, PROOF that the Federal Officer was struck by Renee Good’s car:
Shame on all you Leftists who denied and gaslit about this! Oh wait, yall immune to shame…
2 Likes
Hmm so I see, you’re not crazy.
What’s occurred is that violent crime has simply been replaced by small-time crime. Small-time crime offers a masculine release, satisfying criminals enough so that they are less likely to commit more serious crimes. Almost like a deterrent of sorts.
Leftists seem to be distorting statistics to match their narrative. They ignore all small-time crime even if it is rampant. That is how they push the narrative that California is doing great.
I believe the Democrat approach to communism is “loot stores, anarchy”, when communism needs to be widespread systemic change at the corporate and market level.
Its interesting to see to what lengths people will go to, to distort facts and believe in delusions, if the delusions are needed to continue their beliefs/politics. Very much a problem of the human condition.
It’s funny to say such demonstrably false things in a post ranting about how your personal political boogeymen lie.
So, 2015? How does that explain the falling crime rate in CA from 1990-2015?
How is this proof? The videos are much stronger evidence than a statement from anonymous “officials” in this administration.
Anyway, it’s besides the point. Ross voluntarily got in front of the car, didn’t move out of the way, and fired through the window as the car drove by. He wasn’t protecting himself or anyone else, he killed her because ‘rEsPeCt My AuThOrItY’.
You like videos – here is a sober breakdown of the relevant legal questions:
3 Likes
He’s a police officer.
These people live in an alternate reality where police officers are obligated to get out of the way of criminals resisting arrest.
These people’s ideal police officer:
I call people like Care-less, “these people”, because I was going to call them leftists, or “woke”, or SJWs, but I’m not calling them that anymore. Those are lazy descriptions.
Example:
Mr. A is a LEFTIST, he is not like “these people”.
SJWs refer to real, noble people trying to do social justice, such as Greta Thunburg.
The AI gave me better descriptors for these people.
“Liberal elites” or “coastal elites” capture the archetype you describe: affluent, culturally progressive urbanites who champion open borders, police skepticism (without full abolition), identity-driven “woke” causes, and expansive government control, echoing 1960s hippie ideals but channeled through institutional power.
Core Characteristics
These groups blend anti-authority rhetoric toward law enforcement with faith in centralized state authority for social engineering, often supporting lenient immigration alongside regulatory overreach. They prioritize performative cultural signaling over consistent libertarianism, distinguishing them from true anarchists or small-government advocates.
Alternative Terms
Champagne socialists: Wealthy leftists advocating radical policies they don’t personally endure.
Blue-check authoritarians: Social media influencers pushing censorship and state power under progressive banners.
Limo liberals: Elitist supporters of “woke” causes and big government from insulated lifestyles.
Term Comparison
Term Fits Hippie Roots Open Borders Anti-Police Nuance Pro-Gov’t Control Neutrality Level Liberal elites Medium High High High Medium Champagne socialists Low Medium Medium High Low Blue-check authoritarians Low High High High Low