Living in the Bay Area
I moved to the Bay Area in 2009. Since then, I've lived in various cities all the way from Berkeley and San Francisco to San Jose. There are many things I love about the Bay - the climate is moderate and pleasant throughout the year, jobs are plenty, it's very cosmopolitan and I don't feel out of place as a foreigner. But this blog isn't about the good - there are plenty of places to read that. This blog will talk about the things we don't want to talk about openly with our friends, co workers, neighbors.
So let's talk about the ugly side of the Bay Area. And no, I'm not referring to the ever increasing House Prices that out prices everyone but the top 1% of the earners from home ownership, or the homelessness - which is rampant, or the traffic - which rivals some third world countries with poor infrastructure and population issues.
The above issues are relevant - but I can understand why it happens and in some ways can be handled.
House prices goes up? Get a 500K+ TC job in FAANG? Move further away from the central locations? WFH policies in most companies mean you can afford to live even 2/3 hours away from the core of silicon valley and still enjoy the beautiful weather and nature. Or make a choice between home ownership and California. Life is all about tough choices. Nothing comes easy - it's better to accept that and take actions.
Homelessness? I mean --- yea, but for the most part, they are harmless and they generally congregate in areas that aren't necessarily residential. So any intersections are fleeting. It's not a pretty sight, but then again, it's not like they are homeless by choice.
Traffic? Start early? Maybe listen to something beneficial during the commute? Maybe WFH more. Vote for people who focus on public transportation rather than the Automobile industry?
What are some things I don't like about Bay Area that I feel don't have a simple solution? And what may be causing it?
Let me share some experiences which impacted me the most from my around 15 years living here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Kate_Steinle
This case caught national headlines as a 32 year old Bay Area resident was shot (albeit accidentally) by an illegal immigrant who had a criminal record. The killer - from Mexico was later released on some technicalities.
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/arrest-made-in-connection-to-womans-death-in-san-jose/194822/
A 59 year old woman was brutally slayed by a 24 year old illegal immigrant from El Salvador.
And just to eliminate race as a talking point, here's one more:
Troy McAllister who hit and killed 2 women while driving a stolen car was allowed to remain free despite multiple previous arrests and a history of recidivism.
This is of course just the tip of the iceberg. There are multiple multiple such cases which make you think:
"We had these people marked as risks, however knowing the harm they could do, we still didn't take proper steps to protect normal, law abiding citizens from these criminals".
Now why does an otherwise intelligent society, let this happen.
Some of these are the result of Sanctuary policies - which promotes illegal immigration to the Bay Area in particular. Some other cases are a result of a supremely liberal criminal justice system which professes a preference for restorative justice over punitive.
Now - the underlying case for the above policies can be made as "humanitarianism". But the cynical part of me also believes there are other factors like vote banks, an identity to live up to or pure ignorance.
Crimes happen everywhere. It's not peculiar to the Bay Area.
However the reason these hit harder are because - they could have been easily prevented had we just followed the law.
Immigrate by providing a cause for entry. Show that you have a means to support yourself. When it's time for an immigration case hearing, show up at court.
I understand why people immigrate. I did too! 100s of forms filled, countless hours spent collecting documents, proofs, visiting embassies, staying overnight in different cities for visa interviews, not to mention the hefty fees paid to immigration lawyers, embassies and all those printouts and headaches. Others of course take a risky but shorter path across the border. It's fraught with dangers. Women and children get abused or worse killed.
People put up with all this, because they believe there are better opportunities awaiting elsewhere. After all we only live once and we want what's best for us.
And not all illegal immigrants are criminals. Far from it - I know some of the hardest working, most honorable people are from the immigrant community. But is it possible to have a system where we can weed out the criminals from this influx on the border?
The legal immigration pipeline needs some work - but for most part, if a person is putting 100s of hours of effort in immigrating and finding a job and showing proof of financial independence, it's highly unlikely that he's going to come here and turn to a life of crime to sustain himself.
With illegal immigrants - especially males with the means and necessity to commit crime, the likelihood is much much larger.
So do we need a wall?
Look ---- I'm no fan of Trump, and I'm not a Republican. I completely detest the likes of Trump family, Marjorie Greene or Mitch McConnell.
And I think a wall isn't effective enough to stop immigrants from a country where a drug lord was able to escape a high security prison.
But this is USA, not Kazhakstan. We have technology. We have surveillance options. We have the resources. It's not unthinkable that if the Government puts its mind to it, it can easily weed out criminals from the asylum seekers at the border.
Someone doesn't report for an immigration hearing, put a detainer on him and let ICE do it's job.
Give everyone an option to look for a job, but also follow the laws of the land. Show up for immigration hearings. If you are unable to find a job to sustain yourself, maybe rethink your decision and go back to your home country?
I get it - it's not easy. I had to struggle to find a job but it's much much easier sending emails to recruiters than trying to find blue collar work. And I'm not from a country where I am under risk of being shot by a drug dealer. However is it worth moving from Juarez to let's say San Jose, rather than maybe Guadalajara?
Maybe resettle your family in a safer town within a country you know well, where you know the language and have social programs for help before you transport them to a completely unknown country where you don't even have a legal identification?
I know this sounds heartless!
But at the same time - was Steinle's death not heartless? A 32 year old just starting to build her life and all that effort her parents must have spent raising her and all the hopes and dreams they had for her future snatched away in an instant because there was a transient roaming around the streets of San Francisco with nothing better to do than dumpster diving and discharging a firearm in a tourist area.
You can say - most immigrants aren't criminals.
You are right - but criminals are criminals and they need to be held accountable for their crimes and it's the duty of any society to take steps to prevent crimes.
Protecting a country's border isn't an option. It's ESSENTIAL.
The issue I have with California's justice system is statements like the one below.
"It has become apparent to me that complying with those requests regarding the pending release of undocumented individuals who have committed serious crimes is undermining the trust we need to protect the community," Bolanos said in a written statement.
In what way do we undermine the trust of a community by turning over individuals convicted of serious crimes?
"Oh --- a serial rapist and a violent burglar was arrested and deported. I totally don't feel safe in San Jose anymore"
I don't understand why turning over violent felons to immigration enforcement should interfere with our ability to support law biding asylum seekers.
Is it a fundamental mistrust in the police? If so, isn't that the problem to be addressed? Make the police force accountable? Make immigration attorneys accessible for the vulnerable population?
Coming to the issue of Restorative justice.
I understand it.
If a person steals a loaf of bread because of hunger - for sure, give him a minor slap on the wrist. Maybe see if there's some city program where he can be employed and force him to work there for a reasonable wage for a while.
If a first time burglar shoplifts a shoe or a leather jacket - hmm, still there's some hope for restoration. Let's maybe give them a chance to understand what that slippery slope to a life of burglary looks like. Minimum punishment, but a very clear notice that future transgressions will be punished more severely.
Now ----- we will go to the case of Troy McAllister. Multiple arrests, career felon, had a history of violent offense involving firearms. But Mr. Chesa Boudin was somehow hopeful that Troy will have a change of heart and become an upstanding citizen of San Francisco. So he never charged Troy and let him walk free.
2 people are now dead. If Chesa Boudin is the person responsible for the policies to let felons loose then he should be charged with culpable homicide. His actions (or lack of actions) have caused the loss of 2 lives. And of course we can discount the spate of robberies and lootings that have happened, because if a murderer can be set free, then what's the loss of a few shoes and jackets.
There you go - I believe it's possible to be humanitarian while following the law. And without laws, we are no different than animals.
Comments
Post a Comment