Washington Examiner: "California is ground zero for retail theft prosecution controversy"

I consider the article in question to be fair game since the prosecution of shoplifters was brought up in today’s episode of The Clark Howard Podcast.

We are a state with limited incarceration locations. In fact we house some inmates in Arizona which appears to cost about half as much as housing them here. Because it is difficult to leave the county (let alone the state) without a reservation for a flight or a cruise, I think more people are let out pending trial than other locations, perhaps because of the thought they can be found easily. However, we have had people disappear on the island never to be found again.

We have felony limits here as all states do.

Third-Degree Theft (Misdemeanor Theft) involves the theft of property or services valued at between $250 and $750. Second-Degree Theft (Felony Theft) involves theft directly from a person or of property or services valued at between $750 and $20,000.

However, because we were getting farm thefts, they classified agricultural theft (Felony 3) as starting at $100 of farm items over 25 pounds! I like this part of the law: Possession of agricultural products without ownership and movement certificates, when a certificate is required under chapter 145, is prima facie evidence that the products are or have been stolen.” When we move bags of coffee between areas on the island, we must have a certificate of ownership because all coffee cherry or beans look pretty much alike. Based upon prices here, a half bushell of oranges is a felony. (Actually I don’t buy oranges, so it may only be 3 oranges :slight_smile:

From the article:

The survey’s findings suggest that neither red nor blue states are immune to retail crime but that a pattern of rampant theft can be found within populous, Democratic-run jurisdictions.

Anyone shocked by this? Those cities are getting what they deserve.