The “Karen” act becomes law in SF (lawsuits, vs.)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

This was part of the dude's routine (and a neighbor even came when the cops arrived to state as such); he was still cuffed. Do you believe the same thing would have happened had it been a white woman who exercised/danced in front of her home regularly?

Ok but did the person who called the cops know that? How would have this "CAREN" law prevented that or be used against the caller?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

Neither is exercising, yet the cops got called on them

Well that's probably why he wasn't charged then I assume, right?

[Ceece]

Stupid act, stupid law, layered on top of other stupid laws.

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by sav858

Ok but did the person who called the cops know that? How would have this "CAREN" law prevented that or be used against the caller?

Actually, it's not necessary to know if it was a daily routine or not. Simply replace the black man practicing martial arts/dancing in front of his home with a white woman (in the midst of the same activity) in and of itself. Would the latter have resulted in the same scenario i.e. an emergency-level phone call and handcuffs?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

Actually, it's not necessary to know if it was a daily routine or not. Simply replace the black man practicing martial arts/dancing in front of his home with a white woman (in the midst of the same activity) in and of itself. Would the latter have resulted in the same scenario i.e. an emergency-level phone call and handcuffs?

Less likely it would I agree but my point is how would the “CAREN” law prevent something like this happening? How would you even be able to apply it here?

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by sav858

Less likely it would I agree but my point is how would the “CAREN” law prevent something like this happening? How would you even be able to apply it here?

In theory, it would (could) make the caller think twice about what he/she is reporting i.e. if it is truly an emergency (as in someone dancing); if not, it opens the door to civil remedy/legal recourse.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

In theory, it would (could) make the caller think twice about what he/she is reporting i.e. if it is truly an emergency (as in someone dancing); if not, it opens the door to civil remedy/legal recourse.

So what if is an actual person on drugs so now you have people not reporting it because of this law?

And unless they said they called the cops on them because they were black on on earth would you prove it and pursue some sort of legal recourse?

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by sav858

So what if is an actual person on drugs so now you have people not reporting it because of this law?

And unless they said they called the cops on them because they were black on on earth would you prove it and pursue some sort of legal recourse?

'If' being the key word; what 'if' he isn't on drugs (and is simply performing martial arts).

Reporting/interpreting someone as 'maybe on drugs' is not a life-threatening emergency or crime-in-progress; use the non-emergency SFPD number or call 311/use the app. The CAREN ordinance is relative to racially-motivated 911 calls i.e. 'interpretation' in one's mind rather than 'fact'.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

'If' being the key word; what 'if' he isn't on drugs (and is simply performing martial arts).

Reporting/interpreting someone as 'maybe on drugs' is not a life-threatening emergency or crime-in-progress; use the non-emergency SFPD number or call 311/use the app. The CAREN ordinance is relative to racially-motivated 911 calls i.e. 'interpretation' in one's mind rather than 'fact'.

Well then that's for the police to determine no? If you aren't sure and you feel there is a threat why shouldn't you call 911 or at least the non-emergency line?

Depending on how they are acting it definitely well could be or turn into one. And of course it's easy for you to say this after the fact. Again how would you use the CAREN Act in some sort of legal recourse/remedy here? How would you prove it was racially motivated?

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by sav858

Well then that's for the police to determine no? If you aren't sure and you feel there is a threat why shouldn't you call 911 or at least the non-emergency line?

Depending on how they are acting it definitely well could be or turn into one. And of course it's easy for you to say this after the fact. Again how would you use the CAREN Act in some sort of legal recourse/remedy here? How would you prove it was racially motivated?

Why would one assume a black man dancing/performing martial arts (in a neighborhood) is a threat? A 911 call is not for what you 'think it could be'; it's for reporting facts i.e. 'there is a black man performing martial arts in his yard' (but I'm thinking he might be on drugs or a threat) vs. 'I heard gunshots and I saw a man in a ski mask running from the store'.

There is a distinction between the two i.e. the proof may be in the (recorded) phone call in and of itself relative to (and enough for) civil remedy - at least in theory.