Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need more information but it sounds like that particular area has seen a spike in crime at least partly relating to the Days Inn, where there appears to be some drug dealing. There was a shooting at that hotel not long ago.

It’s not a “spike.” It’s been this way for two years! Remember Cheh out front of the Days Inn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what Ward 3 voted for. Could have elected David Krukoff, but he was an "evil Republican." So the mayor will continue to fill rental apartments on Connecticut Ave. with unemployable voucher recipients, who will continue to victimize aging Ward 3 libs. Might as well rename it "Ward 8 West."

Oh come on.

I lived in another ward for years. Hearing gunfire (typically not "close", but close enough to hear) was a pretty normal weekend during summer occurrence. Ward 3 is NOWHERE NEAR that. You're nuts if you think it is.

Believe it or not, the other Wards used to be like Ward 3. We are now spiraling in that direction.

When was that great-grandpa? Before the War?

And what in the world do you mean by "spiraling in that direction?" Spiraling towards single digit homicides per year? Spiraling towards great school pyramids? Spiraling towards multimillion dollar house values? Because that's what Ward 3 has so if we are "spiraling towards" that it could only be a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps it will be clarified at Frumin's community meeting at UDC on Thursday, but it has not yet been stated that the victim or 2 gunmen had any connection to the voucher program or that any of the 3 lived in a building in Forest Hills.

d
Or whether they knew each other or if this was a random shooting of someone crossing the street.

MPD said it was not random.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need more information but it sounds like that particular area has seen a spike in crime at least partly relating to the Days Inn, where there appears to be some drug dealing. There was a shooting at that hotel not long ago.

It’s not a “spike.” It’s been this way for two years! Remember Cheh out front of the Days Inn.

Her candor was not well received and she suddenly announced she would not run again.

She lives very close to Connecticut & Brandywine. She was engaged on this for years, if she couldn't make more headway, there is no hope for Frumin.

One thing that is striking to me is the WP article upthread saying that people don't lose vouchers even if crimes are committed. People can be evicted from public housing. Why are vouchers both seemingly more protected and portable (even to other states)? I've been told that Housing First tenants from one building who are evicted for non-payment of their small portion of rent or for criminal acts in the building are just moved a building down on Connecticut, or across the street. If there is no accountability, the problems are not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps it will be clarified at Frumin's community meeting at UDC on Thursday, but it has not yet been stated that the victim or 2 gunmen had any connection to the voucher program or that any of the 3 lived in a building in Forest Hills.

d
Or whether they knew each other or if this was a random shooting of someone crossing the street.

MPD said it was not random.

Where? Share source. The latest I saw was it’s still being investigated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what Ward 3 voted for. Could have elected David Krukoff, but he was an "evil Republican." So the mayor will continue to fill rental apartments on Connecticut Ave. with unemployable voucher recipients, who will continue to victimize aging Ward 3 libs. Might as well rename it "Ward 8 West."

Oh come on.

I lived in another ward for years. Hearing gunfire (typically not "close", but close enough to hear) was a pretty normal weekend during summer occurrence. Ward 3 is NOWHERE NEAR that. You're nuts if you think it is.

Believe it or not, the other Wards used to be like Ward 3. We are now spiraling in that direction.

At least Ward 3 is not Trumpy, but one Ward is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of my neighbors who don’t typically pay attention to local politics are awakening and concluding that Matt Frumin may not be the best leader for Ward 3 at this moment in history.

Frumin is a nice guy, but he seems himself as a District-wide policymaker first. The elected advocate for Ward 3 issues, not so much.

^ True. He’s not advocate for the neighborhood, like Cheh was. He has got to go

His response and leadership to date on the crime issue is completely underwhelming. I think parents need to start worrying about Frumins ability to navigate the school boundary revision process. He just doesn’t seem to have the fire in the belly for this job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of my neighbors who don’t typically pay attention to local politics are awakening and concluding that Matt Frumin may not be the best leader for Ward 3 at this moment in history.

Frumin is a nice guy, but he seems himself as a District-wide policymaker first. The elected advocate for Ward 3 issues, not so much.

^ True. He’s not advocate for the neighborhood, like Cheh was. He has got to go

His response and leadership to date on the crime issue is completely underwhelming. I think parents need to start worrying about Frumins ability to navigate the school boundary revision process. He just doesn’t seem to have the fire in the belly for this job.

Frumin was on the committee that *wrote* the awful school boundary revision (that wasn’t adopted because of massive parent and community pushback). Who did people
think they were voting for? Remember, Mary Cheh did NOT endorse Frumin at first…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of my neighbors who don’t typically pay attention to local politics are awakening and concluding that Matt Frumin may not be the best leader for Ward 3 at this moment in history.

Frumin is a nice guy, but he seems himself as a District-wide policymaker first. The elected advocate for Ward 3 issues, not so much.

^ True. He’s not advocate for the neighborhood, like Cheh was. He has got to go

His response and leadership to date on the crime issue is completely underwhelming. I think parents need to start worrying about Frumins ability to navigate the school boundary revision process. He just doesn’t seem to have the fire in the belly for this job.

Frumin was on the committee that *wrote* the awful school boundary revision (that wasn’t adopted because of massive parent and community pushback). Who did people
think they were voting for? Remember, Mary Cheh did NOT endorse Frumin at first…

What was awful about it? I am less than impressed with Frumin and I understand how people people don’t care about “poor rich people” in Ward 3 but this is going to backfire on the rest of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps it will be clarified at Frumin's community meeting at UDC on Thursday, but it has not yet been stated that the victim or 2 gunmen had any connection to the voucher program or that any of the 3 lived in a building in Forest Hills.

d
Or whether they knew each other or if this was a random shooting of someone crossing the street.

MPD said it was not random.

Where? Share source. The latest I saw was it’s still being investigated.

In the ND thread someone shared a communication they had with MPD where it was said they knew one another and there was no threat to the public. Except, of course, the 2 stray bullet threat.

I expect more details will be shared on Thursday at the community meeting.

What, you thought it was some random drive or something by for no reason at all? That make you feel better? Of course it is still being investigated, neither suspect has been arrested. Sometimes the victim is uncooperative, fearing retaliation, lots of possibilities. But, public threat > shelter in place, etc as happened around GW. This is not that based on behavior of LE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what Ward 3 voted for. Could have elected David Krukoff, but he was an "evil Republican." So the mayor will continue to fill rental apartments on Connecticut Ave. with unemployable voucher recipients, who will continue to victimize aging Ward 3 libs. Might as well rename it "Ward 8 West."

Oh come on.

I lived in another ward for years. Hearing gunfire (typically not "close", but close enough to hear) was a pretty normal weekend during summer occurrence. Ward 3 is NOWHERE NEAR that. You're nuts if you think it is.

Believe it or not, the other Wards used to be like Ward 3. We are now spiraling in that direction.

Sorry I am not really seeing why this is a problem?

[Anonymous]

Can’t the police just get rid of the pan handlers? Then they move to public drinking/marijuana. Let’s just start with a few small improvements.

[Anonymous]

The Supreme Court made enforcing vagrancy laws very difficult

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1983/05/03/supreme-court-strikes-down-vagrancy-law/a3fc2b52-f0f2-4f42-82a0-0b64836fe685/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps it will be clarified at Frumin's community meeting at UDC on Thursday, but it has not yet been stated that the victim or 2 gunmen had any connection to the voucher program or that any of the 3 lived in a building in Forest Hills.

d
Or whether they knew each other or if this was a random shooting of someone crossing the street.

MPD said it was not random.

Where? Share source. The latest I saw was it’s still being investigated.

Of course it is being investigated, someone was SHOT in the stomach. Criminal acts that are deliberate and between parties known to one another are still CRIMES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps it will be clarified at Frumin's community meeting at UDC on Thursday, but it has not yet been stated that the victim or 2 gunmen had any connection to the voucher program or that any of the 3 lived in a building in Forest Hills.

d
Or whether they knew each other or if this was a random shooting of someone crossing the street.

MPD said it was not random.

Where? Share source. The latest I saw was it’s still being investigated.

Of course it is being investigated, someone was SHOT in the stomach. Criminal acts that are deliberate and between parties known to one another are still CRIMES.

Loitering laws are enforceable. There are pan handlers parked all day on the commercial strips.