Zoo Lights Shooting and Violence

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article says security will be stepped up and backpacks etc will be screened. So bubbles up wealthy suburban moms (and dads) can now breath easier when Carson and Emily start asking about going.

So? What's wrong with that?

Previous PP apparently prefer that "Carson and Emily" leave the house with a handgun.

Ah, those fun Wild West days.

sure don’t

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

DP

I think people are just making the point that DC leadership is being too soft on crime in general. And, that is not good for public safety.

Why did people start running in panic at the Zoolights?
Did someone shout, “FAREJUMPERS!!” or were they frightened by the sound of what they thought was gunfire?

What’s not good for public safety is the fact that there are too many guns in the U.S. and it’s too easy to get a hold of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

Google "broken windows" and learn how crime has declined since the 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatincentive does anyone have to actually pay for a metro card? That’s an odd way to govern a city. Broken windows theory ....

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding on the topic of fare evasion. Previously, this was a criminal activity, which meant that you could go to jail and earn criminal record for doing it. The DC Council decriminalized it. That does not mean that fare evasion is legal, but rather that it is now a civil violation punishable by a $50 fine. So, to answer your question, the incentive to pay for a metro card is to avoid a $50 fine. It is now similar to a parking violation. If you park in a metered space but don't pay for parking, you do not face the possibility of going to jail. Rather, you will likely be ticketed and fined. Notice that nobody posts questions in this forum asking about the incentive for paying for parking.

Wouldn’t a better analogy be someone parking in a parking garage (example parking garages at the Wharf) and then not paying upon leaving the garage? Not sure how you could get a car to get through the guard gate and exit a parking garage without paying but assuming that is possible...

I would assume the parking garage owner could call the police if you did this.

I don't think that is a better analogy primarily because it depends on a hypothetical assumption. Because cars can't get through gates without damaging them, laws have not been written to account for cars leaving parking garages by magically passing through the gate. Moreover, I don't understand the distinction you make between not paying for garage parking which you consider a crime and not paying for a metered space which you don't consider a crime. Why do you consider these different violations?

What about garages that have metered spaces instead of gates? Is failure to pay in that case a crime for which you should be jailed or a civil violation for which you should be ticketed?

Because street parking doesn’t start off by taking a ticket or passing through a turnstile. One can accidentally fail to pay for parking on the street by misreading a meter or losing track of time. One cannot accidentally jump a turnstile to evade fare.

I don’t think any parking violations should be considered criminal activity. Do I think jumping a turnstile and evading metro fare should be considered criminal? Yes.

DP

I think this is an important difference. You can't accidentally get onto Metro without paying.

+1.

Plus, let's compare the behavior of those two separate group of people after they don't pay.

Which one is a proven and repeated threat to public safety, and which one isn't?

If you are a fare jumper, and don't get into any other trouble, then maybe it's NBD.

But if you are a fare jumper, and then going on to commit crimes on Metro, then that should be taken into consideration, IMO.

Impossible to really tell either way. So, make it a crime to fare jump. Because, it IS a crime. Or, at the very least, enforce the fines that are in place.

It's easier for the police to give my car a parking ticket. Easy for the police to get me on a speed camera. Harder for Metro PD to run after people who jump turnstyles.

It's not hard at all.

You probably are aware that DC is not the only city in the world with a metro system, correct?

[Anonymous]

You know who opposed decriminalizing fare evasion? METRO, the people who actually run the system. They know the fines will not get enforced. It’s a total joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

Google "broken windows" and learn how crime has declined since the 90s.

You'll learn it wasn't because of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

Google "broken windows" and learn how crime has declined since the 90s.

You'll learn it wasn't because of that.

Actually there's a lot of good evidence that "broken windows" (correctly done) reduces crime. "Correctly done" doesn't mean responding disproportionately to small offenses, or even arrests, but rather keeping order in general. So yes, that would include increased police presence at zoo lights, confiscating fireworks, dispersing crowds of kids, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

DP

I think people are just making the point that DC leadership is being too soft on crime in general. And, that is not good for public safety.

yup stupid white liberals are more worried about being called racist than actually enforcing laws

the juvenile justice system and school discipline system is a joke now thanks to liberals and their social justice agenda

young people realize they can get away with things and there is no real consequences for their behavior

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because street parking doesn’t start off by taking a ticket or passing through a turnstile. One can accidentally fail to pay for parking on the street by misreading a meter or losing track of time. One cannot accidentally jump a turnstile to evade fare.

I don’t think any parking violations should be considered criminal activity. Do I think jumping a turnstile and evading metro fare should be considered criminal? Yes.

Shorter PP: violations committed by teenagers are crimes but violations committed by me are not. Are you seriously suggesting that people don't routinely purposely violate parking regulations?

But there is a way to hold parking violators accountable. It’s called fines that double if unpaid, then a boot and then no registration renewal. What is the plan for actual enforcement and collection of tickets for Metro fare evasion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

DP

I think people are just making the point that DC leadership is being too soft on crime in general. And, that is not good for public safety.

yup stupid white liberals are more worried about being called racist than actually enforcing laws

the juvenile justice system and school discipline system is a joke now thanks to liberals and their social justice agenda

young people realize they can get away with things and there is no real consequences for their behavior

And you know that the person(s) that set off the fireworks? And you know that the person(s) who shot those two teens were fare jumpers?
Enlighten me - how do you know this for a fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because street parking doesn’t start off by taking a ticket or passing through a turnstile. One can accidentally fail to pay for parking on the street by misreading a meter or losing track of time. One cannot accidentally jump a turnstile to evade fare.

I don’t think any parking violations should be considered criminal activity. Do I think jumping a turnstile and evading metro fare should be considered criminal? Yes.

Shorter PP: violations committed by teenagers are crimes but violations committed by me are not. Are you seriously suggesting that people don't routinely purposely violate parking regulations?

But there is a way to hold parking violators accountable. It’s called fines that double if unpaid, then a boot and then no registration renewal. What is the plan for actual enforcement and collection of tickets for Metro fare evasion?

There might be a way, but it's not used.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening. I had no idea that “fare-jumpers were responsible for 99% of violence and shootings in the District. Where did all the PP’s get this information from how did I miss this. Can anyone provide a link?

You probably missed it because you are purposefully ignoring data that does not conform with your politics.

And of course you're twisting what previous PP actually said.

Wait, so it’s not just fare jumpers who are responsible for violence and shootings? I’m confused why is there so much focus on fare jumpers?

DP

I think people are just making the point that DC leadership is being too soft on crime in general. And, that is not good for public safety.

yup stupid white liberals are more worried about being called racist than actually enforcing laws

the juvenile justice system and school discipline system is a joke now thanks to liberals and their social justice agenda

young people realize they can get away with things and there is no real consequences for their behavior

But "Restorative Justice" is working and improving things for everyone, victims and aggressors!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because street parking doesn’t start off by taking a ticket or passing through a turnstile. One can accidentally fail to pay for parking on the street by misreading a meter or losing track of time. One cannot accidentally jump a turnstile to evade fare.

I don’t think any parking violations should be considered criminal activity. Do I think jumping a turnstile and evading metro fare should be considered criminal? Yes.

Shorter PP: violations committed by teenagers are crimes but violations committed by me are not. Are you seriously suggesting that people don't routinely purposely violate parking regulations?

But there is a way to hold parking violators accountable. It’s called fines that double if unpaid, then a boot and then no registration renewal. What is the plan for actual enforcement and collection of tickets for Metro fare evasion?

So, this is TERRIBLE social policy, because the difference between a person who walks away from that parking ticket with a minor inconvenience, and one that ends up with their car seized, is whether they have the money to pay their ticket in the first place. So you are effectively leveraging a much heavier weight on a poor person for the same crime, and therefore helping to keep them in poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because street parking doesn’t start off by taking a ticket or passing through a turnstile. One can accidentally fail to pay for parking on the street by misreading a meter or losing track of time. One cannot accidentally jump a turnstile to evade fare.

I don’t think any parking violations should be considered criminal activity. Do I think jumping a turnstile and evading metro fare should be considered criminal? Yes.

Shorter PP: violations committed by teenagers are crimes but violations committed by me are not. Are you seriously suggesting that people don't routinely purposely violate parking regulations?

But there is a way to hold parking violators accountable. It’s called fines that double if unpaid, then a boot and then no registration renewal. What is the plan for actual enforcement and collection of tickets for Metro fare evasion?

So, this is TERRIBLE social policy, because the difference between a person who walks away from that parking ticket with a minor inconvenience, and one that ends up with their car seized, is whether they have the money to pay their ticket in the first place. So you are effectively leveraging a much heavier weight on a poor person for the same crime, and therefore helping to keep them in poverty.

As JFK famously observed, life is unfair. If those on more limited incomes want to avoid the problems that come with not paying parking tickets, then they should be extra careful to park legally.

[Anonymous]

Metro police shouldn’t be wasting their time writing tickets for fare jumpers. They need to focus on violent crime and protecting the system from terrorists. That’s why fare jumping requires criminal penalties as a deterrent, to free cops up. Expired parking meters can be policed by a high school kid, who, with the aid of technology can write 100 tickets an hour.