Hush on skin tone. Got it. Red Line attack-take 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a military family, the idea that the military itself--funding cut, fighting with one hand behind its back--should now babysit petty criminals is laughable to me. On the other hand, I do think our inner cities resemble war zones and we could absolutely have a military/civilian solution in a place like Chicago or Baltimore: send in a "surge" of National Guard (we can't send in the military due to posse comitatus unless we change our laws) to deal with the Isis like thugs who shoot children in alleys, and then a 50 year Marshall plan. Top-down. Tell people who choose to live there exactly what to do. I think the law abiding and productive would be grateful.

Who said anything about enlisting murderers?

Well, this started as a response to "What should be done about violent youths like the ones that attacked this poor man on the Red Line?"

That was pretty much attempted murder, and those are not the kinds of individuals you want to hand a gun and turn loose on civilian populations in troubled parts of the world.

Yes but the conversation has evolved.Rather than jump to the extreme end of things, let's try to be rational here. Anyone who participates in a brutal beating such as this deserves jail, not military enlistment.

Underage children punishment is a revolving door in DC. There needs to be reform and much more serious rehab. the problem is, they don't even know if they caught the kids? How can you punish them? These mobs are learning they can operate with impunity. Metro policing and coordination is chaos. You are taking your life in your hands if you choose to ride it or the buses. The people who suffer most are the hardworking folks who are forced to use it to get to work.

I am for CCTVs everywhere, checkpoints, and roving youth police (like the truancy van I saw in Tenleytown), and reform/transparency to youth punishment.

I agree, which is why military is the answer. Too young for enlistment? Military boarding school until 18 with a heavy influence on education and community service. At graduation, automatic military enrollment. These kids should NOT be allowed to reenter society without at least 4-5 years of behavior correction. Right now, this "correction" is happening in our jail system and it is NOT effective.

The ONLY thing that will get through to these kids is swift and permanent consequences. They don't care about getting arrested or sent to juvenile detention (it's bragging rights for many). They don't care about school or education. They don't care if their actions will have consequences for their parents. Mainly, because the punishments are abstract and easily bendable. We need to rectify this and show them we mean business.

I just think this is a disservice and misunderstanding of the military. I have no problem with a military like reform program (you mention military school) and once the kids have rehabbed the military could be a wonderful option, but though it has changed many lives it is not a reform program in and of itself. It's also unfair to the parents who send their trusting, do good 18 and 19 years olds off for voluntary service to be bunking and serving in this scenario.

While it does not have the title, the military IS a reform sort of program for many. There are MANY who enlist because they don't have a clear future, they don't want to go to college and don't have a good job, etc. The idea that the military is a great draw for fresh-faced high school graduates is a myth. Many enlist because they don't have any other path to making something of their lives.

What would bunking with one of these delinquents harm? You seem to suggest that they're going to enter the military and, with no support system, friends, etc, decide to continue their criminal ways. I disagree. Removal from a bad scenario is 99% of the battle to behavior reform.

[Anonymous]

The military is a lot more selective these days than a lot of you know. They don't take shitheads anymore and they especially don't take criminals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need to demand birth control for anyone that gets even one dime of government assistance. We should also start jailing the moms and dads of kids who are not in control.

I will pray for this man and his family. And I hope they sue Metro.

Wait - you want too force homeowners who receive government subsidies (aka tax deductible mortgage insurance) to take birth control? You want to force birth control on automobile drivers who drive on federally funded roads? Are men who take drugs that were developed with NIH funding going to be forced to get vasectomies? Forced birth control for students at public universities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The military is a lot more selective these days than a lot of you know. They don't take shitheads anymore and they especially don't take criminals.

They take plenty of shitheads. And, I'm talking about petty first offenders not hardened criminals. Jeez, why don't you guys know how to discuss something without jumping to the extreme?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I offered solutions in the deleted thread. In a nutshell:

Criminal mischief should result in immediate enlistment in the military. No go home and pack. Hold them and arrange for immediate enlistment. No second chances. First offense and you're gone. Unless you scare these kids they will not change. Their parents will not (or have tried and failed) to raise them to be productive members of society. Jailing them results in hardened criminals so it makes a bad situation worse.

-AA woman here who realizes that there is no redeeming some kids without immediate swift and harsh action.

Honestly, I think this shows a lot of disrespect for the men and women in uniform. We don't need violent criminals filling the ranks of our armed forces, particularly as so much of the job of an enlisted soldier is to engage with civilians in war zones. That you think the military - a proud tradition with many qualified and educated Americans - should be treated as a de facto penal colony shows how much you think of the armed forces.

+1

I am not the pp. I am a conservative who has a son in the military.
Perhaps the pp has so much respect for the military that she knows the military can actually turn some of these kids around. The military DEMANDS respect from those who are in the military - perhaps she believes this “tough love” of sorts is something these kids need because their parents have not been successful. They learn respect, discipline, and are expected to obey their chain of command.
I’m not sure making mandatory service for criminally mischievous kids is the answer, I am just trying to see her point.

Most of the kids I've seen in alternative settings will not survive in life, as they've been neglected by parents and passed along in the school system. I don't know what the answer is, but the military isn't it. If they can tell a teacher to fuck off, call women cunts to their faces, and physically intimidate staff members, they won't last a day in the service. Prison only hardens them, but it's - sadly - the path many will take.

We've fucked ourselves by refusing to allow schools to educate - fearing instead the wrath of central office for suspending too many disruptive kids yet REFUSING to provide the social services educators need in order to take proactive measures at the elementary level when kids start to show signs of abuse and neglect.

So we end up with gangs of assholes (yes, assholes) who thrive on harming others . . . b/c that's all they know. It's their way to control their lives.

I don't believe this. We're not talking about sending groups of kids to the same military unit. If you have ONE kid enlisted, his attitude at first might be eff off. But, that's the beauty of the military. You learn discipline, respect, how to follow orders, are around positive people, etc. This is not an overnight process. It's a four year program and I think it could be life changing for many young kids who just need a chance.

School is not the answer. These kids don't give a damn.

+1

These kids feel very much "owed" by the people they rob. Not much different than some people, who may not resort to robbing (but still the same principal). Trash is trash, regardless of color.

What kids like this need is a military branch without access to guns. They need to serve other people, and sweat doing it. No one ever made them do anything - they are too coded, and it turns out bad. The worst - it really affects you and me, when we can't go to work without the real possibility of being attacked, as in this case. If you are denying this, you are naive.

[Anonymous]

If you honestly see any of these ideas coming to fruition you're naive. Not gonna happen legislatively people find something else to daydream about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I offered solutions in the deleted thread. In a nutshell:

Criminal mischief should result in immediate enlistment in the military. No go home and pack. Hold them and arrange for immediate enlistment. No second chances. First offense and you're gone. Unless you scare these kids they will not change. Their parents will not (or have tried and failed) to raise them to be productive members of society. Jailing them results in hardened criminals so it makes a bad situation worse.

-AA woman here who realizes that there is no redeeming some kids without immediate swift and harsh action.

Honestly, I think this shows a lot of disrespect for the men and women in uniform. We don't need violent criminals filling the ranks of our armed forces, particularly as so much of the job of an enlisted soldier is to engage with civilians in war zones. That you think the military - a proud tradition with many qualified and educated Americans - should be treated as a de facto penal colony shows how much you think of the armed forces.

+1

I am not the pp. I am a conservative who has a son in the military.
Perhaps the pp has so much respect for the military that she knows the military can actually turn some of these kids around. The military DEMANDS respect from those who are in the military - perhaps she believes this “tough love” of sorts is something these kids need because their parents have not been successful. They learn respect, discipline, and are expected to obey their chain of command.
I’m not sure making mandatory service for criminally mischievous kids is the answer, I am just trying to see her point.

Most of the kids I've seen in alternative settings will not survive in life, as they've been neglected by parents and passed along in the school system. I don't know what the answer is, but the military isn't it. If they can tell a teacher to fuck off, call women cunts to their faces, and physically intimidate staff members, they won't last a day in the service. Prison only hardens them, but it's - sadly - the path many will take.

We've fucked ourselves by refusing to allow schools to educate - fearing instead the wrath of central office for suspending too many disruptive kids yet REFUSING to provide the social services educators need in order to take proactive measures at the elementary level when kids start to show signs of abuse and neglect.

So we end up with gangs of assholes (yes, assholes) who thrive on harming others . . . b/c that's all they know. It's their way to control their lives.

I don't believe this. We're not talking about sending groups of kids to the same military unit. If you have ONE kid enlisted, his attitude at first might be eff off. But, that's the beauty of the military. You learn discipline, respect, how to follow orders, are around positive people, etc. This is not an overnight process. It's a four year program and I think it could be life changing for many young kids who just need a chance.

School is not the answer. These kids don't give a damn.

+1

These kids feel very much "owed" by the people they rob. Not much different than some people, who may not resort to robbing (but still the same principal). Trash is trash, regardless of color.

What kids like this need is a military branch without access to guns. They need to serve other people, and sweat doing it. No one ever made them do anything - they are too coded, and it turns out bad. The worst - it really affects you and me, when we can't go to work without the real possibility of being attacked, as in this case. If you are denying this, you are naive.

A work gang rebuilding trails or a chain gang along the roads would do them a lot of good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to the topic, Red Line attack-take 3.

Given all the threats our city is under, why is there no coordinated way to lock down metro and conduct a search? I find reports that the kids may have escaped on a train going in the opposite direction (despite being pointed our by witnesses) very disturbing. Why can't we put checkpoints at entrances/exits and stop trains????

In the smoke train disaster, we found out metro radios don't work--despite all the lessons of 9/11 and orders to fix those systems going back to 9/11. Similar with cellphone coverage. And they can't even hold a train?

Why is there no inter metro communication system between customers- WMATA workers - WMATA police that works, as well as coordination below ground from WMATA police and above ground with regular DC police response?

It is unacceptable that we are unable to muster a response to a mob attack in a contained space, that should have both communication AND surveillance systems, as well as controlled entrances and egresses.

If Metro (and MPD) can't deal effectively with young punks and thugs, I fear how they would deal with a coordinated attack. You would think that the nation's capital would have the best talent and methods. Metro police and MPD should try to hire some of the top brass who have successfully run NYPD (which has large intelligence and terrorism units) and the Boston police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you honestly see any of these ideas coming to fruition you're naive. Not gonna happen legislatively people find something else to daydream about.

No one said it would really happen - but it SHOULD happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the topic, Red Line attack-take 3.

Given all the threats our city is under, why is there no coordinated way to lock down metro and conduct a search? I find reports that the kids may have escaped on a train going in the opposite direction (despite being pointed our by witnesses) very disturbing. Why can't we put checkpoints at entrances/exits and stop trains????

In the smoke train disaster, we found out metro radios don't work--despite all the lessons of 9/11 and orders to fix those systems going back to 9/11. Similar with cellphone coverage. And they can't even hold a train?

Why is there no inter metro communication system between customers- WMATA workers - WMATA police that works, as well as coordination below ground from WMATA police and above ground with regular DC police response?

It is unacceptable that we are unable to muster a response to a mob attack in a contained space, that should have both communication AND surveillance systems, as well as controlled entrances and egresses.

If Metro (and MPD) can't deal effectively with young punks and thugs, I fear how they would deal with a coordinated attack. You would think that the nation's capital would have the best talent and methods. Metro police and MPD should try to hire some of the top brass who have successfully run NYPD (which has large intelligence and terrorism units) and the Boston police.

Lord Jesus, don't mention the northeast can do anything better here - no one wants to hear the truth. See: snow removal; nation's capital as an embarrassment; how to pretend there is no problem; how to get one's head out of one's arse........shall I continue? A rhetorical question of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The military is a lot more selective these days than a lot of you know. They don't take shitheads anymore and they especially don't take criminals.

They take plenty of shitheads. And, I'm talking about petty first offenders not hardened criminals. Jeez, why don't you guys know how to discuss something without jumping to the extreme?

+100000

Yet, if someone else mentions a viable idea - it is considered (favorite word here, drum roll please....): HYPERBOLE.

Vomit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the topic, Red Line attack-take 3.

Given all the threats our city is under, why is there no coordinated way to lock down metro and conduct a search? I find reports that the kids may have escaped on a train going in the opposite direction (despite being pointed our by witnesses) very disturbing. Why can't we put checkpoints at entrances/exits and stop trains????

In the smoke train disaster, we found out metro radios don't work--despite all the lessons of 9/11 and orders to fix those systems going back to 9/11. Similar with cellphone coverage. And they can't even hold a train?

Why is there no inter metro communication system between customers- WMATA workers - WMATA police that works, as well as coordination below ground from WMATA police and above ground with regular DC police response?

It is unacceptable that we are unable to muster a response to a mob attack in a contained space, that should have both communication AND surveillance systems, as well as controlled entrances and egresses.

If Metro (and MPD) can't deal effectively with young punks and thugs, I fear how they would deal with a coordinated attack. You would think that the nation's capital would have the best talent and methods. Metro police and MPD should try to hire some of the top brass who have successfully run NYPD (which has large intelligence and terrorism units) and the Boston police.

Lord Jesus, don't mention the northeast can do anything better here - no one wants to hear the truth. See: snow removal; nation's capital as an embarrassment; how to pretend there is no problem; how to get one's head out of one's arse........shall I continue? A rhetorical question of course.

+1

Welcome to D.C.: check your common sense at the door. The idea that no one came forward is disgusting.

[Anonymous]

The idea of enlisting these "kids" in the military is brilliant. Of course, they won't be trained in weapons for some years, the idea is to give them structure, discipline and lots of work. Makes them dig ditches, clean the bathrooms, scrub the kitchen floor, show them how much it takes to earn a decent living, everything is not about handouts. I don't care if they resent this or not, I am done being too soft and PC in every approach. Jail has failed, leaving them on the streets is not an option, off to hard labor you go. The thing is these "kids" are products of indiscipline, no structure and no accountability, give them the opposite of that. Some will improve, some will resent it worse than jail but it will instill enough fear so that they think twice before they mug another passenger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the pp who suggested the military for reform.

While I think the military is the best option, another idea:

-(I mentioned this is one of the deleted threads) - Immediately relocate families with children engaged in *petty* criminal mischief. They are moved no less than 50 miles away. Relocation is immediate...no waiting period. For the majority of these kids, it will take moving away from toxic environments/friends. That is 99% of the problem.

First time poster here -- while I agree that the military should not become a repository for criminals, there is value in military training for some kids. My Mom taught high school, and she often commented on how many kids that she thought were headed for nothing but trouble came back from the military as model citizens. Some young people have never had anyone give them boundaries and show them how to earn respect. Some will wash out of the military, but it can be life-changing for those that make it.

As for relocation, there was an interesting study a few years back regarding a city in the midwest (I can't remember which one), where they had dispersed public housing into surrounding middle class communities. It turned out that the crime rate went up in the new communities. Perhaps the values of the new communities will "rub off" over time, but in the short term, they simply redistributed the crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:4) it was rush hour. ... Could nobody help the man/call for help sooner?

I dunno, but if I were there I sure as f*** wouldn't get near a group of 10 teens in this city.

l

Funny how Americans won't intervene when a fellow citizen is being beaten on a crowded train during rush hour yet some Americans foiled terrorist attack in a midair flight. What happened to American courage?

I'm the PP you're responding to. FWIW, I'm a 40 year old mother of 2 young kids and I'm pretty sure I'd get my ass beaten. I also am pretty much always iwth my kids so can't imagine intervening then. Maybe if they were teen girls (vicious as they can be), I was sure they were unarmed, I'd come to the defense of someone. But sorry, I'm too valuable right now and nobody ever taught me how to fight.