Captain Greg Corrales saves the Haight from Demon Weed

|
(63)
Watch out, stoners: He's coming for you

I'm glad to see the Ex now has the data to show what we all knew was happening: The old Drug Warrior at Park Precint, Captain Greg Corrales, is trying to save the Haight from pot smokers.

Hate to have to tell you, Cap, but you lost that battle a loooong time ago.

And here's the thing: Arresting people is expensive. It takes the time of police officers (who, let's remember, often make $100,000 a year or more), it takes the time of the District Attorney's Office, and, since none of the people Corrales arrests can afford private counsel, it takes the time of the Public Defender's Office, which is already so short of money that it might have to stop taking cases.

And meanwhile, San Francisco has a terrible record closing homicide cases.

So now we're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (yes, that's what it will add up to) busting small-time pot dealers in Golden Gate Park.

Remember, the statistics are clear: The "buy-bust" arrests are not nabbing crack or meth or heroin dealers. It's all about the Demon Weed.

It's also part of the quiet transformation of law enforcement and city policy in the Haight, which has become all about "quality-of-life" cases. A guy named Giuliani made that a big deal in New York way back when. Now we have sit-lie, and we have the eviction of the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council Recycling Center, and we have buy-bust. It's really about trying to turn the Haight into a sanitized, movie-set version of itself.

Which, by the way, has never seemed to work.

 

 

 

Comments

AirBnB's alleged obligation to collect taxes that others owe, restaurants allegedly keeping the 4% enforced extra tip on diners and almost anything that any business does in SF?

Didn't Tim want the DA to investigate our Mayor for perjury on the basis of a discredited loser? And to enforce sunshine rules that nobody cares about?

Surely not? Say it ain't so.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 9:51 am

Is Corrales not dead yet? I thought we had a law on the books that made cannabis the lowest enforcement priority for the SFPD. Is Corrales breaking the law again?

Posted by marcos on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:17 am

"Is Corrales not dead yet?"

Always the big-hearted leftist, aren't you, Marcos?

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly, Persistent on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:31 am

Cap'n Greg has cost San Francisco a quarter of a million dollars in settlements for police brutality.

Cap'n Greg came in Dead Fucking Last when he ran for supervisor in D7 9 years ago.

Cap'n Greg holds civilian authority in such contempt that he's breaking the law by enforcing cannabis laws before the more important laws such as littering laws have been enforced.

Cap'n Greg has been threatening to retire so that taxpayers can lavish this criminal with a six figure retirement package that is as fat as he is.

The only way that losers like Cap'n Greg win is when there is corruption in place that insulates them from the consequences of their official actions on the public's time.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:48 am

Those are all excellent reasons for wishing Captain Corrales dead, Marcos.

You get extra points for your mastery of the dialectic by arguing that Captain Corrales is breaking the law by enforcing the law.

Say, I thought that you were moving to some paradisiacal Northern European city to finally get away from the concentrated essence of evil that is AmeriKKKa.

Why haven't you moved yet?

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly, Persistent on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:17 am

Did i say that I wished Corrales dead?

I asked if he'd expired yet.

He's pretty corpulent, like so many cops.

That's why Cap'n Greg avoids putting himself or his officers in harm's way as would be required to keep us safe and prefers to beat up on unarmed motorists and bust small time pot dealers.

One less retired SFPD captain means more money for public services. Am I right?

Posted by marcos on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:42 am

of the ridiculously generous pensions plans we have given to public sector workers and now refuse to do anything about.

So services will continue to be cut, to pay for fat pensions.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:02 pm

That is one seriously fat pig!

Posted by Guest on Apr. 29, 2013 @ 5:21 am

He actually came third out of 12 you fucking piece of shit.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 16, 2014 @ 3:06 pm

Is that your point?

Posted by Guest on Apr. 16, 2014 @ 3:41 pm

Even if it is the "lowest" enforcement priority it still needs to be enforced.

We don't go after pot smokers just because the odd person gets murdered. And the broken windows theory of policing says that you exhibit zero tolerance to law breakers.

Anyone who wants pot can get a medical license. It's really not hard - they give them to anyone.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:45 am

That's not the way it works. If it were, we'd all have received 1000 jay walking tickets by now. There is enforcement discretion, the same way there is prosecutorial discretion.

Posted by The Commish on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:11 am

And that discretion has been directed by law to not prosecute cannabis until all other crimes have been prosecuted.

Corrales should be jailed.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:44 am

If cannabis is the lowest priority, it still gets enforced. If a cop sees a kid smoking pot, he cannot just walk by. He has to arrest.

It just means that if he sees a kid smoking pot at the same time as he sees a kid mugging someone, then he goes after the mugger.

Often it's the same kid doing both anyway.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:04 pm

Nonsense. Cops let people run red lights all the time and don't arrest and that actually puts others at risk of physical harm.

Cops don't bust everyone smoking pot on the street in SF, they couldn't.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 9:36 am

Nobody said all criminals get caught.

What we said is that all illegal acts have to be acted upon IF a cop sees it.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 9:52 am

I've seen cops see people commit moving violations in cars and on bikes and do nothing about it.

Cops don't HAVE to do shit, they get to call their own work plan and that is why San Francisco suffers such crap policing even though we pay more than half a billion dollars per year for the SFPD.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 10:49 am

If their worst flaw is that they do not follow your own personal political priorities, then I can easily live with that.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 11:13 am

The SFPD does not follow city law that spells out what their priorities are to be, the SFPD is insubordinate to civilian authority.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 11:58 am

The law says possession is a low priority. Not dealing drugs on the street.

Posted by Richmondmam on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 5:03 am

Having read this I believed it was really informative.
I appreciate you finding the time and energy to put this content together.
I once again find myself spending way too much time both reading
and commenting. But so what, it was still worth
it!

Posted by silver shoes on Feb. 04, 2014 @ 1:26 am

If you think pot should be legal, then work to change the law, but do not blame cops for doing their job.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 7:57 am

Enforcement priorities work any way that city policy says they should, the cops don't get to make that call under separation of powers.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 9:37 am

That applies whether it is murder or smoking pot.

If you don't like it, then try and get MJ legalized. But until then, it's a crime and the cops are obligated to enforce the law.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 9:53 am

Cops ignore crimes ALL THE TIME, they have tremendous discretion and they don't hesitate to use it according to their own subjective whims.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 10:48 am

give cops judgment and discretion because that is what we pay them for.

I trust the average cop far more than those who try and tell them what to do, who usually have a political agenda anyway.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 11:12 am

Yep, politics is how we allocate scarce resources in a democracy, and there is a scarcity of policing resources relative to the universe of crimes. We have to prioritize and triage and that is the province of the Mayor and Board of Supervisors and voters.

Posted by marcos on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 1:34 pm

that law. And they must do that, absent any other immediate crime that is deemed more serious.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 7:59 am

"A guy named Giuliani made that a big deal in New York way back when."

And Giuliani was remarkably successful, transforming New York from Murder City to the safest big city in America.

Which would you rather live in - a city run by Rudy Giuliani, or a city run by Tim Redmond?

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly, Persistent on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:30 am

quality of life crimes that the murder, rape and robbery crime rates started going down.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:46 am

@Guest - NYC's crime rate went down as part of a national trend. It had nothing to do with Rudy Giuliani and Bernard Kerik's expansion of police powers. The "quality of life" measures were and are concentrated in areas that tourists can see, not across the entire city, so the argument makes no sense in any event.

Posted by Jym Dyer on Apr. 29, 2013 @ 8:45 am

ask me if I give a crap whether it goes down in yours.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 29, 2013 @ 9:07 am

Neither. Cults of personality turn me off. And Rudys personal life was downright slimy.

Posted by pete moss on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 2:18 pm

did that by focusing on quality of life crimes and petty criminals.

I do not see many murders, but I see a lot of pot smoking, vagrancy, littering and sit-lie offences.

Zero tolerance works.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 11:06 pm

Too expensive

Posted by pete moss on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 12:25 pm
Posted by lillipublicans on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 10:56 am

there is just something obnoxious about his posts that are such a turn-off. he sure as shit isn't going to be pursuading any moderates with his consistant nasty tone on any give subject.

what's the point of noting cops' salaries? if anyone in this city deserves to be paid, it is cops, teachers and firefighters.

sit-lie is a Haight policy? Mmm, no, citywide last I looked, and voters actually approved it.

but I agree, spending resources over pot-dealers is just a tremendous waste. Yeah, technically the cops have the right to do this, all of you law-n-order types out there, but c'mon, there are bigger fish to fry, in the Haight and in the city in general.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 12:29 pm

Why Tim worries himself as to what cops make while he always wants more for all the other city do nothings is just strange.

If the cops are getting over like the people in the dept. of Environment, then Tim should be cheering and not whining.

Posted by Matlock on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 6:14 pm

Why Matlock worries himself as to what Tim worries himself is just bizarre. And when will Matlock learn to type a grammatical sentence so that we can understand what he's trying to say?

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 12:28 pm

the dried white spittle from the side of his face. Grammar will have to wait. What I want to know, is that if some people are making a go of it as pot dealers, then how can it be said they are "unemployable?"

As others have noted here, tourists want to be able to buy some weed and get stoned in San Francisco. That's long been part of the draw and enforcement in this time and place is particularly absurd and counterproductive. These dinosaurs should be put out to pasture or at least confined to non-disruptive behavior.

Posted by lillipublicans on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 1:04 pm

I ride by hippie hill on my bike all the time.

Tourists avoid the area.

Posted by Matlock on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 7:26 pm

group of them that does something I need - enforce public safety.

Other than police and fire, and the courts and jails which are County-operated anyway, they could fire the rest, and either outsource the services or simply discontinue them.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 27, 2013 @ 11:05 pm

Kudo's to Cap Corrales. Anything he does to keep the the streets safe from the deadbeats, drug dealers and opportunists out of the parks and off the streets where they can do less harm to others is appreciated.
The don't act like A-holes in front of your homes or businesses, so they aren't a problem, eh?

Posted by Richmondman on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 1:32 pm

If this makes the Haight cleaner, I'm all for it.

Posted by Guest on May. 01, 2013 @ 11:45 am

It also appears we lost the battle on gang violence, and murder so according to the Guardian we should not pursue robberies, or killings since SF lost the battle to control them looooooooooong ago

Why don't we just give up and make up our own laws as we see fit as individuals.

Kill your neighbor if his dog barks at night
run red lights if in a hurry to pick up your kids at school or
burn down a newspaper if you disagree with their views.

Posted by Guest oldfart on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 2:07 pm

IHe is a part of an old guard in law enforcement that are the reason we have more people incarcerated per capita than any other country.
I just wrote a piece on this for the Fog City Journal. We need to re-prioritize our law enforcement resources now.
http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/5492/rethinking-law-enforcement-...

Posted by Andrew Resignato on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 2:15 pm

Busting pot dealers does nothing except divert law enforcement resources away from more important crimes: violent and property. At community meeting about muggings, shootings, and home invasions Coarrales talks about the 'nexus' between drugs and crime. There is no such nexus and studies have proved it over and over. We need to re-prioritize our law enforcement resources now. http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/5492/rethinking-law-enforcement-...

Posted by Andrew Resignato on Apr. 26, 2013 @ 2:26 pm

The broken windows method of politicking is true, tried and tested.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 11:53 am

Zero tolerance for all crimes but don't even think of raising my taxes!

Perhaps the poster might be more comfortable living in somewhere authoritarian like Communist China?

Posted by marcos on Apr. 28, 2013 @ 12:08 pm

Idon't see why my tax $'s should go to some unattainable abstraction like 'zero tolerance'.

Maybe you'd be happier in some bright and shiny new antiseptic place like Irvine or Singapore, guest.

Posted by pete moss on Apr. 29, 2013 @ 10:53 am