MCPD released 14 and 16 year olds who committed armed robbery in Gaithersburg to their parents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before this thread goes further:

MCPD would not have made the decision to release the suspects to their parents. They follow the direction of the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS). DJS would make the decision whether or not to hold them.

If you’re concerned about this decision, then you would have to direct your questions to DJS. And they won’t tell you anyway because the case involves juveniles.

Thank you for that clarification. Does anyone know why DJS would make this call?

Because two years ago, our state legislators decided to pass a law that is much more lenient on juvenile offenders.

Trying to "right size" that juvenile justice reform is a big piece of the General Assembly's work this session. They are trying to give police more power to do things like question juveniles, and refer juveniles to DJS for certain crimes that involve handguns.

It goes back to who we voted for. Vote better next time.

[Anonymous]

A 15yo and another juvenile robbed a guy of 2 pairs of shoes with a hammer ( hit him in the head)about a month ago in broad daylight, also in Gaithersburg, also released to parents.
That one happened near the library.
It’s crazy. This one didn’t make the news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A 15yo and another juvenile robbed a guy of 2 pairs of shoes with a hammer ( hit him in the head)about a month ago in broad daylight, also in Gaithersburg, also released to parents.
That one happened near the library.
It’s crazy. This one didn’t make the news.

Wow. I would be outraged if I lived near to there .

[Anonymous]

No surprise. Current criminal justice policy in Maryland and DC prioritizes the well-being of the offender over public safety and any impacts on future victims, and treats the desire for justice on behalf of past victims as an atavistic holdover from primitive times, and likely a feature of structural oppression because criminal offenders, as a class, are less privileged than their victims on average. This is what these people really think; why the great bulk of law-abiding citizens tolerates this as criminal justice policy is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

Ok assuming that "wrap around service funding is inadequate" what is an acceptable risk level of recidivism to the general public? What is the evidence that these policies will be effective at reducing crime and how much will this cost?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

Ok assuming that "wrap around service funding is inadequate" what is an acceptable risk level of recidivism to the general public? What is the evidence that these policies will be effective at reducing crime and how much will this cost?

How much is a human life worth to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

Ok assuming that "wrap around service funding is inadequate" what is an acceptable risk level of recidivism to the general public? What is the evidence that these policies will be effective at reducing crime and how much will this cost?

How much is a human life worth to you?

Well, why are you valuing the life of the offender/criminal over their victims? Because it’s not a matter of how much is a human life worth to you, but rather how much do you value the life of the criminal and are you willing to invest in their redemption to no limit, regardless of the human and financial cost of pursuing that redemption?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

Ok assuming that "wrap around service funding is inadequate" what is an acceptable risk level of recidivism to the general public? What is the evidence that these policies will be effective at reducing crime and how much will this cost?

How much is a human life worth to you?

Well, why are you valuing the life of the offender/criminal over their victims? Because it’s not a matter of how much is a human life worth to you, but rather how much do you value the life of the criminal and are you willing to invest in their redemption to no limit, regardless of the human and financial cost of pursuing that redemption?

Children who never had a chance don't deserve to be punished just because they were mistreated for so long that they became adults.

Build support for children first, then lock up criminals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because Maryland passed this:
https://www.aecf.org/blog/maryland-enacts-sweeping-youth-justice-reforms

There is an effort currently underway to make it a bit more strict:
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/juvenile-justice-reform-preliminary-approval-senate-bill-744/60027395

But as you can see quoted in the article above, not all are in favor:

Criminalizing children doesn't improve public safety. The way to improve public safety is to address the child's needs very early, not stigmatizing them with criminalization, not cops putting them in handcuffs, not putting them in cages or cells, not putting them in prison.

That law doesn't apply to violent handgun crimes like this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because Maryland passed this:
https://www.aecf.org/blog/maryland-enacts-sweeping-youth-justice-reforms

There is an effort currently underway to make it a bit more strict:
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/juvenile-justice-reform-preliminary-approval-senate-bill-744/60027395

But as you can see quoted in the article above, not all are in favor:

Criminalizing children doesn't improve public safety. The way to improve public safety is to address the child's needs very early, not stigmatizing them with criminalization, not cops putting them in handcuffs, not putting them in cages or cells, not putting them in prison.

Are you in favor of abusing children until they turn to crime?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because Maryland passed this:
https://www.aecf.org/blog/maryland-enacts-sweeping-youth-justice-reforms

There is an effort currently underway to make it a bit more strict:
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/juvenile-justice-reform-preliminary-approval-senate-bill-744/60027395

But as you can see quoted in the article above, not all are in favor:

Criminalizing children doesn't improve public safety. The way to improve public safety is to address the child's needs very early, not stigmatizing them with criminalization, not cops putting them in handcuffs, not putting them in cages or cells, not putting them in prison.

They aren't being criminalized, though. They are being referred for services, which include mental health and substance misuse screening. The State services are woefully inadequate, for certain, but they aren't criminalizing kids. Almost no children are detained, and the ones who are either present a serious safety threat to a family member and have nowhere else to live, or are accused of an act so egregious, they need to be detained.

For example, what do you do with the 13 year old who is molesting his 5 year old sister? Release him to his parents? I certainly would not want that. And don't assume parents always work to protect the victimized kids. Sometimes they do not. Often they have their own mental illness or substance abuse issues to deal with. Often they are in denial. Often, they are abusers themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Releasing kids who have shown the wherewithal to find their ways to guns does seem like the strangest thing in the world. It says to me they have no place to hold them and obviously no one wants to foster them (nor would that be safer). We do need to start building juvenile facilities with proper wrap around services and accountability again.


Or charge them as adults and send them to prison.

Or, we create juvenile detention facilities that are seriously committed to repatterning behavior---not just holding pens where the kids can while away their days playing Grand Theft Auto and learning further criminal behavior from other miscreants. Serious repatterning involves seriously relentless structure plus nurture. Tiered systems of privileges tied to achieving educational and behavioral milestones. Therapy and therapeutic interventions to try to deal with kids who have prenatal exposure brain damage and/or trauma that impairs their ability to regulate emotions and appreciate cause and effect consequences. Educational milestones that can lead to skilled trade work and the ability to earn an immediate living wage. And for all of them---appropriate societal reparative work in the form of community service---cleaning graffiti, picking up trash. But in no event should violent teens just be part of a Catch & Release that sends them back to the homes and environments that produced the behavior. And for those teens who won't avail themselves of the structure/nurture options offered in juvenile detention, then adult prison may be the end result.

I've maintained this for years. Repatterning behavior is a great way to put it! I've thought that incarcerated youth should have to reach certain wickets provided in the youth facility, ie GED, counseling. job training, community service, and an exit plan--further schooling, type of employment etc. They would need to demonstrate some maturity, attainment and good behavior for release. Otherwise, their release could continue to be reevaluated by a board, like a parole board, until say 26. This is for non adult crimes. For adult crimes, same thing but held longer.

Rehabilitation doesn't work well. 80% of people arrested for violent crime will be arrested for another crime within 9 years. The reality is that there are some people that are just bad apples and they cannot be helped. Until we have a better way to determine who is likely to be reformed and who cannot be helped, we should just lock all of them up and throw away the key. What is an acceptable level or risk for the general public that a released violent offender commits another violent crime in their lifetime 1%, 10%, 50%? The lifetime recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. We need to prioritize protecting the rights and safety of the general public over violent criminals.

It's because wraparound services are inadequate. I have a nonprofit that desperately needs government funding to fix this problem. Please send money.

Ok assuming that "wrap around service funding is inadequate" what is an acceptable risk level of recidivism to the general public? What is the evidence that these policies will be effective at reducing crime and how much will this cost?

How much is a human life worth to you?

Well, why are you valuing the life of the offender/criminal over their victims? Because it’s not a matter of how much is a human life worth to you, but rather how much do you value the life of the criminal and are you willing to invest in their redemption to no limit, regardless of the human and financial cost of pursuing that redemption?

Children who never had a chance don't deserve to be punished just because they were mistreated for so long that they became adults.

Build support for children first, then lock up criminals.

So their victims deserve to be punished because people had horrible childhoods? Wow. At least you're saying it out loud. This is the reality of what criminal justice reform advocates believe. This is beyond frightening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to go after the gun company that made the gun and sold it to a 14 year old without a background check.

It was a ghost gun. Did you miss that part in the article? Privately manufactured firearms is the politically correct term for ghost guns.

Since the kid was the manufacturer, the PP is correct, they need to go after them since the kid made the gun. Easy peasy.