Understanding Juvenile Carjacking: A Panel Discussion Moderated by Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good recap at link in Schwab's post. The voices of parents and those in the community should be given more weight than those of ideologues and activists who may not even live in DC, imho.

I'm sure those parents are going to be accused of being GOO plants.

[Anonymous]

Car jacking is an EXTREMELY anti-social behavior. It's terrifying for the person being car jacked, who is not only having their mode of transportation stolen from, but generally is being threatened with their life. Car jacking among adults should be prosecuted and punished to the full ability of the law because it is the kind of crime that creates general fear in the community and can inhibit people's ability or willingness to go to work and engage in other commerce. It is really bad for communities. Car jacking among kids needs an aggressive deterrence program, where there are real consequences for the kids that do it, as well as ongoing education and messages in these communities to make sure kids understand these consequences AND understand how car jacking hurts not just the victims but also their neighbors and families, who become more fearful as car jacking becomes more common.

So much this. This is a very serious crime.

Carjacking is one step away from hijacking, it is about causing terror and terrorizing a community. Carjacking always carries a threat to be maimed or killed.

Otherwise it would be car theft - bad enough, but not carjacking.


What carjacking is certainly NOT - it is NOT a harmless “unauthorized use of a vehicle”
I would call something unauthorized use of a vehicle, if my own underaged kid took our own car on our farm and drove around there without my permission and without ability to actually drive safely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excellent point, PP

"There is nothing progressive about allowing violent criminals to rampage through marginalized communities with impunity."

We need to provide these citizens with the wrap-around services they need, so they don't need to resort to a life of crime to survive. The failure is on society for not providing these marginalized citizens a way forward.

NP. Nobody needs to be committing carjacking and dumping the cars a few hours later “to survive”. These people aren’t stealing loaves of bread. They’re terrorizing society.

Actually it makes sense to steal a car for a few hours, use it to run errands such as the grocery store, laundry mat or a run to a food bank. Then dump it somewhere. It literally makes sense, rather than a car rental which requires a valid ID card, credit card, etc. This is really about resources.

DC should have a car rental program in which impoverished residents can check out a car for a few hours and then drop it off a hubs located throughout the city.

Wtf? If I don't have a car, I would use public transport, not become a criminal.

+1
Is PP serious? Is there a single 13-26 year old aged “youth” in DC who shoved a gun into a driver’s face, and then took that car to get their dry cleaning done?

NO!!! I can’t anymore, there’s enough material here to make a movie.

[Anonymous]

Every time I see the tweet above, I think of busybee guy asking questions about lived truth and then I snort a little. PP on the guest reference nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is a wrap around service? I hear about them quite a bit.

Do handcuffs, straightjackets and jail cells also count? After all, they are literally wrapped around the violent offender so they can't hurt their next victim.

[Anonymous]

I. don’t. Care?

Can we Prop a castle doctrine that applies to one’s body, real property and car? Let’s go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I. don’t. Care?

Can we Prop a castle doctrine that applies to one’s body, real property and car? Let’s go.

That would be totally against the DC Council's governing philosophy. Only violent criminals are allowed to shoot people and get away with it, not the other way around.

Women were not even allowed to have pepper spray until very recently. Spraying the criminal in the eyes might cause him to miss when trying to shoot you, and that would be totally unfair to the poor criminal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excellent point, PP

"There is nothing progressive about allowing violent criminals to rampage through marginalized communities with impunity."

We need to provide these citizens with the wrap-around services they need, so they don't need to resort to a life of crime to survive. The failure is on society for not providing these marginalized citizens a way forward.

NP. Nobody needs to be committing carjacking and dumping the cars a few hours later “to survive”. These people aren’t stealing loaves of bread. They’re terrorizing society.

Actually it makes sense to steal a car for a few hours, use it to run errands such as the grocery store, laundry mat or a run to a food bank. Then dump it somewhere. It literally makes sense, rather than a car rental which requires a valid ID card, credit card, etc. This is really about resources.

DC should have a car rental program in which impoverished residents can check out a car for a few hours and then drop it off a hubs located throughout the city.

1) No one, and I mean no one, is car jacking in order to run errands to the grocery store, laundry mat, or a food bank. People who are going to the grocery store and laundry mat have bought into a baseline level of human decency that does not involve shoving a gun in someone's face, ordering them out of their car, and then stealing it.

2) A major reason behind youth car jacking is that these kids cannot legally drive cars. So a car rental program wouldn't even work for them. As one of the articles posted upthread mentioned, one reason you see a lot of 13/14/15/16 yr old kids carjacking is that these kids do not have drivers licenses and cannot legally drive, so car jacking is a way for them to get a car and drive. This is also a reason why so many car jackign arrests involve teens -- they are crap drivers and therefore are more likely to get in a car accident with the stolen vehicle, leading to apprehension. They are car jacking because they are immature children who are being poorly supervised or guided by adults.

3) The other major reason behind car jacking, for youth and adults, is in service to other crimes. Stealing a car in order to go commit a shooting or robbery will make it harder to be linked to the crime than using your own car. Again, a car rental service where you had to show ID would not serve this purpose. On the other hand, a car rental service where you didn't have to show idea would just become a getaway car service. Genius.

Car jacking is an EXTREMELY anti-social behavior. It's terrifying for the person being car jacked, who is not only having their mode of transportation stolen from, but generally is being threatened with their life. Car jacking among adults should be prosecuted and punished to the full ability of the law because it is the kind of crime that creates general fear in the community and can inhibit people's ability or willingness to go to work and engage in other commerce. It is really bad for communities. Car jacking among kids needs an aggressive deterrence program, where there are real consequences for the kids that do it, as well as ongoing education and messages in these communities to make sure kids understand these consequences AND understand how car jacking hurts not just the victims but also their neighbors and families, who become more fearful as car jacking becomes more common.

Also, how about before we start some kind of charitable car rental services, we just make public transportation really strong.

Your second point is age gating. 16 year olds can safely operate vehicles. There's no reason to believe that these slightly younger drivers can't safely operate vehicles. The only reason they can't drive is an arbitrary decision to limit the right to drive to a group with arguably decreasing reaction times and physical skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I. don’t. Care?

Can we Prop a castle doctrine that applies to one’s body, real property and car? Let’s go.

Owning a car privilege, not a right.

[Anonymous]

With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

I think you may be rushing this. You just need to give the current policies and services more time to work. A few more years and the results will start to show positive change. You can’t just arrest and prosecute everyone and expect things to change. Have faith in the elected leaders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

Even if the police made the arrests, there is no support in the rest of the criminal justice system for that approach. The Council doesn’t support it. The AG who has sole responsibility for juvenile crime, doesn’t support it. The USAO won’t prosecute murders, threats to kill police, and gun crimes. The PDS Superior Court judges won’t support it. And the even more liberal Court of Appeals won’t support it.

It took 8 years of Racine, 6 years of Allen and his cronies, and years of Superior Court neglect to get us here. It will take years to dig out, and we don’t have a system (or electorate) that even agrees that changes need to be made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

I think you may be rushing this. You just need to give the current policies and services more time to work. A few more years and the results will start to show positive change. You can’t just arrest and prosecute everyone and expect things to change. Have faith in the elected leaders.

This is satire right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

We already know Broken Windows doesn’t work. The cops mostly ended up hassling working class black guys on their way to their jobs (or coming home from work), because those were easy targets for making their monthly “stop” numbers. Most cops didn’t want to actually deal with a legit gangbanger carrying a firearm.

I’m fine with bringing back the jump out squads who target drug dealers or folks selling stolen goods. Also fine with random traffic stops to ensure license plates are legit, vehicle is not stolen, or no outstanding tickets greater than $1000 (this will ensnare a lot of Maryland vehicles).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With violent crime soaring back to 90s levels, it's time to bring back broken windows policing. Discuss.

We already know Broken Windows doesn’t work. The cops mostly ended up hassling working class black guys on their way to their jobs (or coming home from work), because those were easy targets for making their monthly “stop” numbers. Most cops didn’t want to actually deal with a legit gangbanger carrying a firearm.

I’m fine with bringing back the jump out squads who target drug dealers or folks selling stolen goods. Also fine with random traffic stops to ensure license plates are legit, vehicle is not stolen, or no outstanding tickets greater than $1000 (this will ensnare a lot of Maryland vehicles).

Yes, this is the part of broken windows policing that could really make a difference. Right now it's just a stupid free-for-all.