DC will pay residents not to commit crime

[Anonymous]

Based on a successful program in California. I wonder who would be a beneficiary of the program?

http://wtop.com/dc/2016/02/dc-bill-would-pay-people-stipends-not-to-commit-crimes/

The D.C. Council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a bill that includes a proposal to pay residents a stipend not to commit crimes. It’s based on a program in Richmond, California, that advocates say has contributed to deep reductions in crime there.

Under the bill, city officials would identify up to 200 people a year who are considered at risk of either committing or becoming victims of violent crime. Those people would be directed to participate in behavioral therapy and other programs. If they fulfill those obligations and stay out of trouble, they would be paid.

[Anonymous]

Well, Montgomery County will pay people up to $3,000 to move their illegal sheds and fences off public property, and I know who will be a beneficiary of that program.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/residents-along-path-of-proposed-purple-line-told-to-move-fences-sheds/2016/01/05/a3df5f50-b3e1-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html?wprss=rss_story-local-traffic-stream&tid=sm_tw_pl

[Anonymous]

We already pay for welfare, food stamps, housing, phones, etc, now we gotta pay for them to not kill, rape and steal. Wow! Liberals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We already pay for welfare, food stamps, housing, phones, etc, now we gotta pay for them to not kill, rape and steal. Wow! Liberals

DId you notice the 54% increase in homicides in the District last year from the year before? Seems a good idea to try anything and everything we can think of to address crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We already pay for welfare, food stamps, housing, phones, etc, now we gotta pay for them to not kill, rape and steal. Wow! Liberals

You do realize we pay for them when we put them in jail too, right? Probably a lot more than we pay through this program. At least this way, they might not commit a crime against an innocent person.

[Anonymous]

I posted about this program the other day in the thread about Metro attacks and fully support it.

But the key to making it work in Richmond was that participation was at will. They came forward at their own volition and signed contracts, they weren't "directed" into the program. I hope the reporter was just taking a shortcut on that detail.

They'd also be missing a significant piece without mentorship from people who are from the same background. They need people who are familiar with the hurdles because they've already jumped them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We already pay for welfare, food stamps, housing, phones, etc, now we gotta pay for them to not kill, rape and steal. Wow! Liberals

Do you never tire of spouting your endless stream of bullshit here? Go to the Breitbart blog where you can be among like minded idiots.

[Anonymous]

It looks like they have to participate in regular therapy in order to be eligible for the stipend.

[Anonymous]

Google "Office of Neighborhood Safety"

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/opinion/sunday/to-stop-crime-hand-over-cash.html?_r=0

From the program's director (emphasis mine):

In 2014, we celebrated the lowest number of firearm assaults and homicides in more than four decades. Richmond recorded a 76 percent reduction in homicides and a 69 percent reduction in firearm assaults from 2007, when the Office of Neighborhood Safety was created.

In reality, we’ve achieved these results not simply by the cash incentive. Our change agents work with about 150 clients a year, at a cost of about $20,000 per person, which pays for daily mentoring, coaching and companionship. By comparison, it costs our city about $200,000 to hire one new police officer

.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Google "Office of Neighborhood Safety"

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/opinion/sunday/to-stop-crime-hand-over-cash.html?_r=0

From the program's director (emphasis mine):

In 2014, we celebrated the lowest number of firearm assaults and homicides in more than four decades. Richmond recorded a 76 percent reduction in homicides and a 69 percent reduction in firearm assaults from 2007, when the Office of Neighborhood Safety was created.

In reality, we’ve achieved these results not simply by the cash incentive. Our change agents work with about 150 clients a year, at a cost of about $20,000 per person, which pays for daily mentoring, coaching and companionship. By comparison, it costs our city about $200,000 to hire one new police officer

.

Not arguing if this is good or bad, but the bolded quote shows just how immune to caring about the cost the people implementing it are, since the $200,000 cited is but a fraction of the three million dollars the program costs. Do they not know how to multiply 20,000 by 150?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google "Office of Neighborhood Safety"

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/opinion/sunday/to-stop-crime-hand-over-cash.html?_r=0

From the program's director (emphasis mine):

In 2014, we celebrated the lowest number of firearm assaults and homicides in more than four decades. Richmond recorded a 76 percent reduction in homicides and a 69 percent reduction in firearm assaults from 2007, when the Office of Neighborhood Safety was created.

In reality, we’ve achieved these results not simply by the cash incentive. Our change agents work with about 150 clients a year, at a cost of about $20,000 per person, which pays for daily mentoring, coaching and companionship. By comparison, it costs our city about $200,000 to hire one new police officer

.

Not arguing if this is good or bad, but the bolded quote shows just how immune to caring about the cost the people implementing it are, since the $200,000 cited is but a fraction of the three million dollars the program costs. Do they not know how to multiply 20,000 by 150?

But the cost of a police officer is only a fraction of the cost of ineffective policing. There's also court costs, incarceration costs, and the cost to victims. And none of it working.

The benefit goes beyond reducing violence by transforming offenders into law-abiding citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on a successful program in California. I wonder who would be a beneficiary of the program?

http://wtop.com/dc/2016/02/dc-bill-would-pay-people-stipends-not-to-commit-crimes/

The D.C. Council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a bill that includes a proposal to pay residents a stipend not to commit crimes. It’s based on a program in Richmond, California, that advocates say has contributed to deep reductions in crime there.

Under the bill, city officials would identify up to 200 people a year who are considered at risk of either committing or becoming victims of violent crime. Those people would be directed to participate in behavioral therapy and other programs. If they fulfill those obligations and stay out of trouble, they would be paid.

The cost of dealing with repeat offenders in the justice system is more than what we would pay to entice them not to commit crimes. Sounds good to me. They may need to expand it over 200 people though.

Next they need build homes for the homeless. That will also help with crime, and with reducing costs for managing the homeless population. Salt Lake City is a great example of this. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/22/home-free

[Anonymous]

Obama's "criminal justice reform" has already released 6,000 convicted felons onto America's streets.

Convicts - who would otherwise be in prison right now.

And DeBlasio is busy dis-mantling the exact programs that vastly reduced crime in NYC.

So it is no surprise that the crime rate is going up.

We are now led to believe that the solution to increasing crime is simply to "throw money at the problem" ??

This "solution" is utterly stupid. If this idea is representative of "progressive thinking," then count me out.

[Anonymous]

Can I sign up? I'm really good at not committing crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama's "criminal justice reform" has already released 6,000 convicted felons onto America's streets.

Convicts - who would otherwise be in prison right now.

And DeBlasio is busy dis-mantling the exact programs that vastly reduced crime in NYC.

So it is no surprise that the crime rate is going up.

We are now led to believe that the solution to increasing crime is simply to "throw money at the problem" ??

This "solution" is utterly stupid. If this idea is representative of "progressive thinking," then count me out.

I know, right? DeBlasio was clearly responsible for the uptick in crime in DC last year.