DC will pay residents not to commit 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

Agree! This is crazy! -democrat who used to think she was liberal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Laugh it up. The dead bodies will pile up at an increasing rate in DC; just as they are in Baltimore. And NYC. Policies, like elections, have consequences.

But you go on; make jokes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Laugh it up. The dead bodies will pile up at an increasing rate in DC; just as they are in Baltimore. And NYC. Policies, like elections, have consequences.

But you go on; make jokes.

Did you read the article? In California, when they implemented the program, the homicide and assault rates decreased dramatically. It may not work as well in DC as it did in CA, but there's no reason to think that the program will result in dead bodies piling up. More generally, there's no reason to think that DC is like Baltimore or will become like Baltimore.

[Anonymous]

Maybe they should pay not to have babies until after college

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they should pay not to have babies until after college

Teen birth rates are down. Granted, they're not as low as with white teens (who tend to abort) but it's still decreasing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

To repeat: Montgomery County is paying rich people in Chevy Chase $3,000 to move their illegal sheds and fences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Laugh it up. The dead bodies will pile up at an increasing rate in DC; just as they are in Baltimore. And NYC. Policies, like elections, have consequences.

But you go on; make jokes.

Did you read the article? In California, when they implemented the program, the homicide and assault rates decreased dramatically. It may not work as well in DC as it did in CA, but there's no reason to think that the program will result in dead bodies piling up. More generally, there's no reason to think that DC is like Baltimore or will become like Baltimore.

I don't give a damn how they do it in California. Paying criminals not to commit crimes is a stupid idea.

You can pay a mobster protection money (extortion) and they will not beat you up. Same exact thing.

I have a better idea: arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate. At least they will not be victimizing the public while they are locked up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't give a damn how they do it in California. Paying criminals not to commit crimes is a stupid idea.

You can pay a mobster protection money (extortion) and they will not beat you up. Same exact thing.

I have a better idea: arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate. At least they will not be victimizing the public while they are locked up.

Shorter PP: I don't want to do something that's effective! I want to do something that doesn't work and costs a hell of a lot of money to boot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Laugh it up. The dead bodies will pile up at an increasing rate in DC; just as they are in Baltimore. And NYC. Policies, like elections, have consequences.

But you go on; make jokes.

Did you read the article? In California, when they implemented the program, the homicide and assault rates decreased dramatically. It may not work as well in DC as it did in CA, but there's no reason to think that the program will result in dead bodies piling up. More generally, there's no reason to think that DC is like Baltimore or will become like Baltimore.

I don't give a damn how they do it in California. Paying criminals not to commit crimes is a stupid idea.

You can pay a mobster protection money (extortion) and they will not beat you up. Same exact thing.

I have a better idea: arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate. At least they will not be victimizing the public while they are locked up.

Incarceration is not effective, except to continue the cycle. You should know this by now.

[Anonymous]

I am happy to pay anyone " at risk" to not commit crimes.. the public is the beneficiary here!

[Anonymous]

They are being paid a stipend to participate in a program designed for at-risk folk. A condition of the program is not committing a crime. Am I missing something?

[Anonymous]

So if the program works....then what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if the program works....then what?

Then DC becomes a less violent place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if the program works....then what?

Then DC becomes a less violent place.

You mean like a lifetime stipend for those thugs?

[Anonymous]

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

Is this true? I hope so. Then at least this plan will be slightly more palatable than pure extortion. Without the therapy, do people really think that a meger check from the government will deter people from committing a crime? If that were the case, why haven't the plethora of public assistance programs currently in place had that effect? Seriously. If this problem was really about money, there a lot of wonderful programs already out there that subsidize those who need it.