Longterm dc area residents, have you noticed decline ?

[Anonymous]

You think things have declined now. Wait until CRE collapses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure where people are seeing an uptick in crime. These numbers are normal for a city the size of DC.

Be smart and be vigilant, but this is not Fairview, CT, if that's what you're looking for obviously you'll be sorely disappointed. DC is vastly safer than LA, Miami, Chicago, NY, and parts of TX.

If you feel you should be able to walk around drunk, half dressed, while wearing expensive attire, the latest phone in hand and without a care in the world to your surroundings, this is not the place for you. You'll need to move elsewhere for that. True city living is about adaptation.

I’m sorry, but as someone who was born in DC 50+ years ago and has seen it evolve, I call bullsh*t.

Anyone who doesn’t like crime needs to move, because as long as you’re smart and vigilant, it’s all good? Are you effing kidding me? What a messed up take.

There have been vast improvements in the city, but its current state is far from ideal.

[Anonymous]

I have a lot of friends that are NYC cops so I can't speak to this area but O agree with the PP. The culture of the police force and how we view them has changed. They will not put their life or pension at risk in so-so situations. They know if something goes south no one has their back.

They also can no longer use certain types of holds that keep them safe. So I ask you, if it were your life or pension, would you continue to put yourself at risk? Quitting isn't an option. You are within 5 years of your pension too.

So that black guy that just stole something? Nope, not arresting him. Too risky for too little reward. Group of black people causing store damage and only one cop? Nope, not touching that with a 10 foot pole. Literally my friend will avoid arrests and high risk situations for petty crime. It isn't worth the personal risk. So it's skyrocketing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a lot of friends that are NYC cops so I can't speak to this area but O agree with the PP. The culture of the police force and how we view them has changed. They will not put their life or pension at risk in so-so situations. They know if something goes south no one has their back.

They also can no longer use certain types of holds that keep them safe. So I ask you, if it were your life or pension, would you continue to put yourself at risk? Quitting isn't an option. You are within 5 years of your pension too.

So that black guy that just stole something? Nope, not arresting him. Too risky for too little reward. Group of black people causing store damage and only one cop? Nope, not touching that with a 10 foot pole. Literally my friend will avoid arrests and high risk situations for petty crime. It isn't worth the personal risk. So it's skyrocketing.

This is 100% spot on. We brought this upon ourselves and drowned out the few brave voices that tried to warn us three summers ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure where people are seeing an uptick in crime. These numbers are normal for a city the size of DC.

Be smart and be vigilant, but this is not Fairview, CT, if that's what you're looking for obviously you'll be sorely disappointed. DC is vastly safer than LA, Miami, Chicago, NY, and parts of TX.

If you feel you should be able to walk around drunk, half dressed, while wearing expensive attire, the latest phone in hand and without a care in the world to your surroundings, this is not the place for you. You'll need to move elsewhere for that. True city living is about adaptation.

There is a 39% increase in violent crime in DC YTD year on year over 2022. On track for worst homicide rate in 20 years. Do you live in a rich area because those of us in the high crime areas do not accept hearing gunshots and worrying about ourselves and kids being struck in crossfire when drive by happen within blocks of our home. Stick your head in the sand much? Scoff at Black and Brown bodies being predominantly impacted as no big deal because you live in your white rich bubble of upper NW?

Pardon the rant but scr*w you and your oblivion to the obviously increased crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure where people are seeing an uptick in crime. These numbers are normal for a city the size of DC.

Be smart and be vigilant, but this is not Fairview, CT, if that's what you're looking for obviously you'll be sorely disappointed. DC is vastly safer than LA, Miami, Chicago, NY, and parts of TX.

If you feel you should be able to walk around drunk, half dressed, while wearing expensive attire, the latest phone in hand and without a care in the world to your surroundings, this is not the place for you. You'll need to move elsewhere for that. True city living is about adaptation.

There is a 39% increase in violent crime in DC YTD year on year over 2022. On track for worst homicide rate in 20 years. Do you live in a rich area because those of us in the high crime areas do not accept hearing gunshots and worrying about ourselves and kids being struck in crossfire when drive by happen within blocks of our home. Stick your head in the sand much? Scoff at Black and Brown bodies being predominantly impacted as no big deal because you live in your white rich bubble of upper NW?

Pardon the rant but scr*w you and your oblivion to the obviously increased crime.

DP and ignores that im cities mentioned, violent crime is DECREASING while dramatically increasing in DC.

Again keep sticking your head in the sand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a lot of friends that are NYC cops so I can't speak to this area but O agree with the PP. The culture of the police force and how we view them has changed. They will not put their life or pension at risk in so-so situations. They know if something goes south no one has their back.

They also can no longer use certain types of holds that keep them safe. So I ask you, if it were your life or pension, would you continue to put yourself at risk? Quitting isn't an option. You are within 5 years of your pension too.

So that black guy that just stole something? Nope, not arresting him. Too risky for too little reward. Group of black people causing store damage and only one cop? Nope, not touching that with a 10 foot pole. Literally my friend will avoid arrests and high risk situations for petty crime. It isn't worth the personal risk. So it's skyrocketing.

This is 100% spot on. We brought this upon ourselves and drowned out the few brave voices that tried to warn us three summers ago.

I worn in a majority Black office and my coworkers thought "Defund police" was a horrible slogan and take in the aftermath of Floyd. "Reform police" would have been better. It was also not supported by Black participants in polling whatsoever (feel free to google). It's another example of not truly listening to Black voices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a lot of friends that are NYC cops so I can't speak to this area but O agree with the PP. The culture of the police force and how we view them has changed. They will not put their life or pension at risk in so-so situations. They know if something goes south no one has their back.

They also can no longer use certain types of holds that keep them safe. So I ask you, if it were your life or pension, would you continue to put yourself at risk? Quitting isn't an option. You are within 5 years of your pension too.

So that black guy that just stole something? Nope, not arresting him. Too risky for too little reward. Group of black people causing store damage and only one cop? Nope, not touching that with a 10 foot pole. Literally my friend will avoid arrests and high risk situations for petty crime. It isn't worth the personal risk. So it's skyrocketing.

This is 100% spot on. We brought this upon ourselves and drowned out the few brave voices that tried to warn us three summers ago.

I worn in a majority Black office and my coworkers thought "Defund police" was a horrible slogan and take in the aftermath of Floyd. "Reform police" would have been better. It was also not supported by Black participants in polling whatsoever (feel free to google). It's another example of not truly listening to Black voices.

So much is driven by social media. I recall when LeBron James was expressing his outrage when a police officer shot a black women as she was in the act of stabbing a black teenage girl to death in Cleveland. The police officer was wrecked online for doing his job.

There's no win for police officers in this climate. Every interaction is recorded by phones. Everything can be taken out of context. And local DAs are prosecuting police officers. Look at what happened to the DC police officers who gave chase to a violent drug dealer on a scooter. They're going to prison.

Black Lives Matter destroyed policing in America. It's such a tough job. There are more guns than people in this country. You never know what a domestic disturbance call is going to turn into. You never know who's carrying during a traffic stop. It's an extremely stressful job.

Of course cops are checking out. And it's the rational thing to do. Absolutely no cop in this climate is going to stop a CVS robber when there are a million phones on them, all looking for some excessive force that they can post online. And the DAs and judges let most criminals go anyway. No one is risking a job, pension, and their well-being in those circumstances.

Black Lives Matter was a disaster for American cities. And I don't know how we come back from that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing today's crime to the crime that existed 30-40 years ago is a straw man. Those statistics are irrelevant. They simply don't matter any longer. It's much more relevant to look at crime trends over the last 10 years or so. Why? The city has changed. Society has changed. Everyday life has changed way too much.

So looking at crime trends over the last 10 years or so, no doubt things have declined. It's alarming, frankly. But nothing will be done because we can't even agree on whether it's worse than it was "before" so we keep electing politician who do absolutely nothing about it.

I don't see why 10 years is any less arbitrary than 30 or 40 years, though. Yes, society has changed. One change between 30 years ago and 20 years ago was that crime fell, significantly, in D.C., which also gained both population and wealth and income. What's the point in ignoring that?

I agree that comparisons to 30 or 40 years ago shouldn't be used to dismiss crime today, but pretending crime has always been as low as it was a decade ago and that the only relevant metric is how it's gone up since then seems sort of misguided in its own way.

Why can't we look at the whole arc and say, crime used to be even higher, it fell significantly, it is now rising rapidly again?

+1

-Long term dc area resident

The problem is that people looking back 30-40 years ago are using that time frame to dismiss what's happening now. "Oh, it was much worse before. Stop complaining, you transplants have no idea!" And going back that far is irrelevant because the crime is different now: different locations, different times of day, different types of crimes. How do we determine what to do about the crime NOW if we're focused on what was happening decades ago?

No one is "pretending" that crime was always as low as it was 10 years ago. But at that time, something was obviously working to keep crime low. What was it? What changed? We can't even be bothered to answer those questions because it's still not as bad as it was in the 80s, right?

I've lived here 20 years. Not sure if that qualifies me as a "long term dc resident" in your mind, though.

I realize there are some people who are saying this, and I agree that pointing to crime stats of the past can be used to shut down discussion of crime today. But not even criminologists have good answers to some of these questions, many of which are being asked in cities all around the country, i.e., not just in D.C., which should at least tell us that local policies on their own are not the only reasons things changed or the only way to address the problem.

To me, the pat answers both sides are equally simplistic. Yes, crime is rising, and no one should dismiss that. Also yes, crime was higher in the past, and no one should dismiss that. But also, no, none of this is happening in a vacuum, and it's not all because of one D.C. Council decision or one U.S. Attorney's Office policy. I don't have answers for this situation, but I'm pretty sure it's not just a function of "oh if only we did this one thing, it would all be perfect."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing today's crime to the crime that existed 30-40 years ago is a straw man. Those statistics are irrelevant. They simply don't matter any longer. It's much more relevant to look at crime trends over the last 10 years or so. Why? The city has changed. Society has changed. Everyday life has changed way too much.

So looking at crime trends over the last 10 years or so, no doubt things have declined. It's alarming, frankly. But nothing will be done because we can't even agree on whether it's worse than it was "before" so we keep electing politician who do absolutely nothing about it.

I don't see why 10 years is any less arbitrary than 30 or 40 years, though. Yes, society has changed. One change between 30 years ago and 20 years ago was that crime fell, significantly, in D.C., which also gained both population and wealth and income. What's the point in ignoring that?

I agree that comparisons to 30 or 40 years ago shouldn't be used to dismiss crime today, but pretending crime has always been as low as it was a decade ago and that the only relevant metric is how it's gone up since then seems sort of misguided in its own way.

Why can't we look at the whole arc and say, crime used to be even higher, it fell significantly, it is now rising rapidly again?

+1

-Long term dc area resident

The problem is that people looking back 30-40 years ago are using that time frame to dismiss what's happening now. "Oh, it was much worse before. Stop complaining, you transplants have no idea!" And going back that far is irrelevant because the crime is different now: different locations, different times of day, different types of crimes. How do we determine what to do about the crime NOW if we're focused on what was happening decades ago?

No one is "pretending" that crime was always as low as it was 10 years ago. But at that time, something was obviously working to keep crime low. What was it? What changed? We can't even be bothered to answer those questions because it's still not as bad as it was in the 80s, right?

I've lived here 20 years. Not sure if that qualifies me as a "long term dc resident" in your mind, though.

I realize there are some people who are saying this, and I agree that pointing to crime stats of the past can be used to shut down discussion of crime today. But not even criminologists have good answers to some of these questions, many of which are being asked in cities all around the country, i.e., not just in D.C., which should at least tell us that local policies on their own are not the only reasons things changed or the only way to address the problem.

To me, the pat answers both sides are equally simplistic. Yes, crime is rising, and no one should dismiss that. Also yes, crime was higher in the past, and no one should dismiss that. But also, no, none of this is happening in a vacuum, and it's not all because of one D.C. Council decision or one U.S. Attorney's Office policy. I don't have answers for this situation, but I'm pretty sure it's not just a function of "oh if only we did this one thing, it would all be perfect."

DC Crime Facts has a ton of data driven info re: DC crime

Peruse at your leisure.

Here's one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure where people are seeing an uptick in crime. These numbers are normal for a city the size of DC.

Be smart and be vigilant, but this is not Fairview, CT, if that's what you're looking for obviously you'll be sorely disappointed. DC is vastly safer than LA, Miami, Chicago, NY, and parts of TX.

If you feel you should be able to walk around drunk, half dressed, while wearing expensive attire, the latest phone in hand and without a care in the world to your surroundings, this is not the place for you. You'll need to move elsewhere for that. True city living is about adaptation.

I’m sorry, but as someone who was born in DC 50+ years ago and has seen it evolve, I call bullsh*t.

Anyone who doesn’t like crime needs to move, because as long as you’re smart and vigilant, it’s all good? Are you effing kidding me? What a messed up take.

There have been vast improvements in the city, but its current state is far from ideal.

+1, from another person born in D.C. in the 1970s. It doesn't matter what people are wearing, they don't deserve to be crime victims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing today's crime to the crime that existed 30-40 years ago is a straw man. Those statistics are irrelevant. They simply don't matter any longer. It's much more relevant to look at crime trends over the last 10 years or so. Why? The city has changed. Society has changed. Everyday life has changed way too much.

So looking at crime trends over the last 10 years or so, no doubt things have declined. It's alarming, frankly. But nothing will be done because we can't even agree on whether it's worse than it was "before" so we keep electing politician who do absolutely nothing about it.

I don't see why 10 years is any less arbitrary than 30 or 40 years, though. Yes, society has changed. One change between 30 years ago and 20 years ago was that crime fell, significantly, in D.C., which also gained both population and wealth and income. What's the point in ignoring that?

I agree that comparisons to 30 or 40 years ago shouldn't be used to dismiss crime today, but pretending crime has always been as low as it was a decade ago and that the only relevant metric is how it's gone up since then seems sort of misguided in its own way.

Why can't we look at the whole arc and say, crime used to be even higher, it fell significantly, it is now rising rapidly again?

+1

-Long term dc area resident

The problem is that people looking back 30-40 years ago are using that time frame to dismiss what's happening now. "Oh, it was much worse before. Stop complaining, you transplants have no idea!" And going back that far is irrelevant because the crime is different now: different locations, different times of day, different types of crimes. How do we determine what to do about the crime NOW if we're focused on what was happening decades ago?

No one is "pretending" that crime was always as low as it was 10 years ago. But at that time, something was obviously working to keep crime low. What was it? What changed? We can't even be bothered to answer those questions because it's still not as bad as it was in the 80s, right?

I've lived here 20 years. Not sure if that qualifies me as a "long term dc resident" in your mind, though.

MPD has long been plagued by issues; however, they were generally effective at curbing crime until 2016.

Do not dismiss the effect on the average MPD officer of the “defund the police” movement. MPD officers watched closely as Baltimore arrested police officers (Black police officers) and put them through a criminal trial. Those officers prevailed against Baltimore’s baseless and politically-driven prosecution. They the officers sued the city. And won.

MPD officers got the message loud and clear: do not risk your job by arresting criminals.

Honestly, please explain to me why any sane MPD officer would bother arresting a dangerous or violent criminal? Risk your job over that? And for what??

On top of that, progressives continually push anti-prosecution prosecutors, who drop every case the police bring.

So again, if every one of your arrests is going to simply be dismissed by the prosecutor, why would you take the risk of arresting violent criminals?

These situations are seriously what is happening now on the streets of DC. It is not a mystery.

And criminals in DC know they will not face serious consequences.

DC is a one-party town. That party owns this town, and now they own it’s problems.

Those police officers in Baltimore got off on a technicality. A man died in those officers custody and his neck was snapped when they did not strap him down and drove recklessly thereby causing his neck to snap. Those same officers then booked and processed him while he lay dying. So no I don't want MPD to act like the police in Baltimore or any other place. I'd rather 10 criminals walk free than to have a man die at the hands of police brutality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing today's crime to the crime that existed 30-40 years ago is a straw man. Those statistics are irrelevant. They simply don't matter any longer. It's much more relevant to look at crime trends over the last 10 years or so. Why? The city has changed. Society has changed. Everyday life has changed way too much.

So looking at crime trends over the last 10 years or so, no doubt things have declined. It's alarming, frankly. But nothing will be done because we can't even agree on whether it's worse than it was "before" so we keep electing politician who do absolutely nothing about it.

I don't see why 10 years is any less arbitrary than 30 or 40 years, though. Yes, society has changed. One change between 30 years ago and 20 years ago was that crime fell, significantly, in D.C., which also gained both population and wealth and income. What's the point in ignoring that?

I agree that comparisons to 30 or 40 years ago shouldn't be used to dismiss crime today, but pretending crime has always been as low as it was a decade ago and that the only relevant metric is how it's gone up since then seems sort of misguided in its own way.

Why can't we look at the whole arc and say, crime used to be even higher, it fell significantly, it is now rising rapidly again?

+1

-Long term dc area resident

The problem is that people looking back 30-40 years ago are using that time frame to dismiss what's happening now. "Oh, it was much worse before. Stop complaining, you transplants have no idea!" And going back that far is irrelevant because the crime is different now: different locations, different times of day, different types of crimes. How do we determine what to do about the crime NOW if we're focused on what was happening decades ago?

No one is "pretending" that crime was always as low as it was 10 years ago. But at that time, something was obviously working to keep crime low. What was it? What changed? We can't even be bothered to answer those questions because it's still not as bad as it was in the 80s, right?

I've lived here 20 years. Not sure if that qualifies me as a "long term dc resident" in your mind, though.

MPD has long been plagued by issues; however, they were generally effective at curbing crime until 2016.

Do not dismiss the effect on the average MPD officer of the “defund the police” movement. MPD officers watched closely as Baltimore arrested police officers (Black police officers) and put them through a criminal trial. Those officers prevailed against Baltimore’s baseless and politically-driven prosecution. They the officers sued the city. And won.

MPD officers got the message loud and clear: do not risk your job by arresting criminals.

Honestly, please explain to me why any sane MPD officer would bother arresting a dangerous or violent criminal? Risk your job over that? And for what??

On top of that, progressives continually push anti-prosecution prosecutors, who drop every case the police bring.

So again, if every one of your arrests is going to simply be dismissed by the prosecutor, why would you take the risk of arresting violent criminals?

These situations are seriously what is happening now on the streets of DC. It is not a mystery.

And criminals in DC know they will not face serious consequences.

DC is a one-party town. That party owns this town, and now they own it’s problems.

Those police officers in Baltimore got off on a technicality. A man died in those officers custody and his neck was snapped when they did not strap him down and drove recklessly thereby causing his neck to snap. Those same officers then booked and processed him while he lay dying. So no I don't want MPD to act like the police in Baltimore or any other place. I'd rather 10 criminals walk free than to have a man die at the hands of police brutality.

"Reform the police" yes, but not "defund the police"

[Anonymous]

From WP today, talks about increase in the randomness of crime in DC https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/09/11/dc-violence-gun-deaths-residents/

[Anonymous]

I’ve lived in the suburbs since 2000 and DC has become a lot worse in the past
~5 or so years. The homeless are much more aggressive and visible.