Shooting in Georgetown October 20

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see both sides’ argument here.
What I really want is ban guns.

Guns are already illegal in the district. How does a ban address the crime problem when people are already carrying illegal weapons? Who's going to go around and collect all the guns after the ban goes into effect?! Get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The description is vague.

It’s actually detailed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is a shooting in Georgetown news? There are shootings all the time all over the city.

I know the answer, but OP might need to think on that.

NP, and why should OP "think on that?" Of course there are shootings all the time in the city, but rarely in Georgetown. Are you new here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see both sides’ argument here.
What I really want is ban guns.

I really want to ban violent criminals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off-duty cop stopped an attempted armed carjacking. One suspect still on the loose.

Also, a friendly reminder that you should NEVER get your news from The Washington Post when it comes to local crime. Cops gave a detailed description of the perp in a press conference ("black male, with a black top with white reflective lettering, dark pants and white shoes.")

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCPoliceDept/status/1450719300885614592

This is what The Washington Post reported: "Officials said they are looking for another man and gave only a vague description of him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-shooting-carjacking-georgetown/2021/10/20/9fd13b70-3187-11ec-9241-aad8e48f01ff_story.html

Just a total dereliction of journalistic duty to refuse to report information about a suspect who poses a danger to the public.

Shorter OP: I'm mad because they Post didn't identify the perp by his race.

What would that have added for you?

Um, maybe identifying info to help identify the suspect? This reminds me of when I lived in NY (moved here a few years ago). The papers stopped identifying criminals beyond clothing so virtually every description was “male in jeans and a Yankees hat.” That’s half the city.

"Black male in a dark shirt and dark pants with white shoes" probably fits nearly as many people in DC as "Yankees cap and jeans" does in New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off-duty cop stopped an attempted armed carjacking. One suspect still on the loose.

Also, a friendly reminder that you should NEVER get your news from The Washington Post when it comes to local crime. Cops gave a detailed description of the perp in a press conference ("black male, with a black top with white reflective lettering, dark pants and white shoes.")

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCPoliceDept/status/1450719300885614592

This is what The Washington Post reported: "Officials said they are looking for another man and gave only a vague description of him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-shooting-carjacking-georgetown/2021/10/20/9fd13b70-3187-11ec-9241-aad8e48f01ff_story.html

Just a total dereliction of journalistic duty to refuse to report information about a suspect who poses a danger to the public.

Shorter OP: I'm mad because they Post didn't identify the perp by his race.

What would that have added for you?

Um, maybe identifying info to help identify the suspect? This reminds me of when I lived in NY (moved here a few years ago). The papers stopped identifying criminals beyond clothing so virtually every description was “male in jeans and a Yankees hat.” That’s half the city.

Adding race without a whole lot of additional information— including basics like height, age, hairstyles, etc. — is, to quote you: “Half the the city.”
So, again, since the only thing the PP was mad about was that the “Post didn’t identify the perp by his race”, what would that have added for you in the absence of quite a few other details? Or are “male” and”black” details that you view as sufficiently helpful in identifying potential suspects?

It’s chilling that you find “male in jeans and a Yankees hat” too broad to be useful, but seem to be saying that “black” and “male” is somehow more helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see both sides’ argument here.
What I really want is ban guns.

You should definitely keep pushing for that. Loudly. And primary any dem who won’t promise to ban every single gun in existence, starting with the registered ones. Please. Do. This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off-duty cop stopped an attempted armed carjacking. One suspect still on the loose.

Also, a friendly reminder that you should NEVER get your news from The Washington Post when it comes to local crime. Cops gave a detailed description of the perp in a press conference ("black male, with a black top with white reflective lettering, dark pants and white shoes.")

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCPoliceDept/status/1450719300885614592

This is what The Washington Post reported: "Officials said they are looking for another man and gave only a vague description of him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-shooting-carjacking-georgetown/2021/10/20/9fd13b70-3187-11ec-9241-aad8e48f01ff_story.html

Just a total dereliction of journalistic duty to refuse to report information about a suspect who poses a danger to the public.

Shorter OP: I'm mad because they Post didn't identify the perp by his race.

What would that have added for you?

Um, maybe identifying info to help identify the suspect? This reminds me of when I lived in NY (moved here a few years ago). The papers stopped identifying criminals beyond clothing so virtually every description was “male in jeans and a Yankees hat.” That’s half the city.

Adding race without a whole lot of additional information— including basics like height, age, hairstyles, etc. — is, to quote you: “Half the the city.”
So, again, since the only thing the PP was mad about was that the “Post didn’t identify the perp by his race”, what would that have added for you in the absence of quite a few other details? Or are “male” and”black” details that you view as sufficiently helpful in identifying potential suspects?

It’s chilling that you find “male in jeans and a Yankees hat” too broad to be useful, but seem to be saying that “black” and “male” is somehow more helpful.

Given the indisputable crime statistics (more than half of all homicides in this country are committed by black people, despite their being only 13 percent of the population) and the demography of the city, it's actually a matter of public safety to include race as a descriptor, whether the lookout is for someone black, white, brown, or anything else. Otherwise, readers just will revert to stereotypes, which ironically is what the Post thinks it is avoiding by not printing the race of the alleged perps.

[Anonymous]

This officer is a hero. Hope they find the second guy before he jacks someone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is a shooting in Georgetown news? There are shootings all the time all over the city.

I know the answer, but OP might need to think on that.

Black on black crime versus black on white crime is the answer.

A local news blog in Arlington is positively ecstatic when a white or person of all but one race commits a crime in Arlington and allows the comments free rein. When a crime is committed with no description and comments are turned off, it is a patronizing micro-aggression against the perpetrator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see both sides’ argument here.
What I really want is ban guns.

You should definitely keep pushing for that. Loudly. And primary any dem who won’t promise to ban every single gun in existence, starting with the registered ones. Please. Do. This.

So all crimes with guns are committed with registered guns? Could you share the source of those statistics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off-duty cop stopped an attempted armed carjacking. One suspect still on the loose.

Also, a friendly reminder that you should NEVER get your news from The Washington Post when it comes to local crime. Cops gave a detailed description of the perp in a press conference ("black male, with a black top with white reflective lettering, dark pants and white shoes.")

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCPoliceDept/status/1450719300885614592

This is what The Washington Post reported: "Officials said they are looking for another man and gave only a vague description of him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-shooting-carjacking-georgetown/2021/10/20/9fd13b70-3187-11ec-9241-aad8e48f01ff_story.html

Just a total dereliction of journalistic duty to refuse to report information about a suspect who poses a danger to the public.

Shorter OP: I'm mad because they Post didn't identify the perp by his race.

What would that have added for you?

Um, maybe identifying info to help identify the suspect? This reminds me of when I lived in NY (moved here a few years ago). The papers stopped identifying criminals beyond clothing so virtually every description was “male in jeans and a Yankees hat.” That’s half the city.

Adding race without a whole lot of additional information— including basics like height, age, hairstyles, etc. — is, to quote you: “Half the the city.”
So, again, since the only thing the PP was mad about was that the “Post didn’t identify the perp by his race”, what would that have added for you in the absence of quite a few other details? Or are “male” and”black” details that you view as sufficiently helpful in identifying potential suspects?

It’s chilling that you find “male in jeans and a Yankees hat” too broad to be useful, but seem to be saying that “black” and “male” is somehow more helpful.

Because a lot of white, Asian, and Hispanic men who wearbYanjees hats have already committed the crime of being a Yankees fan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off-duty cop stopped an attempted armed carjacking. One suspect still on the loose.

Also, a friendly reminder that you should NEVER get your news from The Washington Post when it comes to local crime. Cops gave a detailed description of the perp in a press conference ("black male, with a black top with white reflective lettering, dark pants and white shoes.")

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCPoliceDept/status/1450719300885614592

This is what The Washington Post reported: "Officials said they are looking for another man and gave only a vague description of him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-shooting-carjacking-georgetown/2021/10/20/9fd13b70-3187-11ec-9241-aad8e48f01ff_story.html

Just a total dereliction of journalistic duty to refuse to report information about a suspect who poses a danger to the public.

Shorter OP: I'm mad because they Post didn't identify the perp by his race.

It’s DC. Was it necessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a shooting in Georgetown news? There are shootings all the time all over the city.

I know the answer, but OP might need to think on that.

I get your point, but police-involved shootings make news every time.

Oh I don’t know, maybe because it’s unusual? Contemplate that.

[Anonymous]

Worth noting here is that had the police not inserted themselves into this situation, there would’ve been no shooting at all.