“Yall voted for this”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the officer's statement (assuming he said it). Isn't it illegal to ride ATVs in the streets? So was he told not to arrest people doing it?

Yes, they are told not to arrest because it disproportionally criminalizes Black and brown behavior.

Politicians forget that the erosion of quality of life this causes also disproportionately impacts Black and brown community members.

I thought it was because the process of arresting the riders would involve multiple police vehicles chasing the ATVs in residential neighborhoods— thereby putting the residents and other pedestrians in even greater risk.

Surely this could be done with video/camera and identification/prosecution later. If someone's photo isn't publicly online, then sure, there's no case, but I bet all of these people are on social media somewhere

DC voters overwhelmingly approve of the ATV riders. There is zero will to shut this down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's no way a cop said that. That would be wildly, wildly unprofessional.

Obviously you don’t know many MPD officers. They’re fed up with your bullsh!t and the way you vote, and they’re giving you what you voted for.

I’ve heard this as a theme from most of the cops I know. It started after Micheal Brown and Freddie Gray, and then accelerated after George Floyd. They’re here to punch a clock now. To get paid and do as little as possible. They hate you (rightfully so) for electing the politicians that make their jobs impossible. So their goal is to do as little as possible and let you deal with the consequences of your vote.


Seriously, I cannot stress enough to you how much the average cop, black, white, brown or yellow, hates the average white UMC DC resident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the officer's statement (assuming he said it). Isn't it illegal to ride ATVs in the streets? So was he told not to arrest people doing it?

Yes, they are told not to arrest because it disproportionally criminalizes Black and brown behavior.

Politicians forget that the erosion of quality of life this causes also disproportionately impacts Black and brown community members.

I thought it was because the process of arresting the riders would involve multiple police vehicles chasing the ATVs in residential neighborhoods— thereby putting the residents and other pedestrians in even greater risk.

Surely this could be done with video/camera and identification/prosecution later. If someone's photo isn't publicly online, then sure, there's no case, but I bet all of these people are on social media somewhere

So hundreds of white men get away with insider trading every day and you want to go after some kids who aren't hurting anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the officer's statement (assuming he said it). Isn't it illegal to ride ATVs in the streets? So was he told not to arrest people doing it?

Yes, they are told not to arrest because it disproportionally criminalizes Black and brown behavior.

Politicians forget that the erosion of quality of life this causes also disproportionately impacts Black and brown community members.

I thought it was because the process of arresting the riders would involve multiple police vehicles chasing the ATVs in residential neighborhoods— thereby putting the residents and other pedestrians in even greater risk.

Surely this could be done with video/camera and identification/prosecution later. If someone's photo isn't publicly online, then sure, there's no case, but I bet all of these people are on social media somewhere

DC voters overwhelmingly approve of the ATV riders. There is zero will to shut this down.

It's like go-go and mambo sauce. It's celebrated because it is uniquely DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the officer's statement (assuming he said it). Isn't it illegal to ride ATVs in the streets? So was he told not to arrest people doing it?

Yes, they are told not to arrest because it disproportionally criminalizes Black and brown behavior.

Politicians forget that the erosion of quality of life this causes also disproportionately impacts Black and brown community members.

I thought it was because the process of arresting the riders would involve multiple police vehicles chasing the ATVs in residential neighborhoods— thereby putting the residents and other pedestrians in even greater risk.

Surely this could be done with video/camera and identification/prosecution later. If someone's photo isn't publicly online, then sure, there's no case, but I bet all of these people are on social media somewhere

So hundreds of white men get away with insider trading every day and you want to go after some kids who aren't hurting anyone?

OP, do you now realize how stupid you sound for thinking we didn’t vote for this?

[Anonymous]

Let me remind everyone how traffic laws work in DC:

12 year old driving an ATV down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour: no penalty

Moped driver blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Motorcyclist blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Cyclist with infant placed in basket in front of bike: no penalty

Cyclist with two small children on back with no helmets: no penalty

Car driver going 50 mph in a 25 mph zone with no traffic cameras: no penalty

Car driver doesnt stop at stop sign for full three seconds at empty intersection with camera: $100, doubled after 30 days

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me remind everyone how traffic laws work in DC:

12 year old driving an ATV down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour: no penalty

Moped driver blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Motorcyclist blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Cyclist with infant placed in basket in front of bike: no penalty

Cyclist with two small children on back with no helmets: no penalty

Car driver going 50 mph in a 25 mph zone with no traffic cameras: no penalty

Car driver doesnt stop at stop sign for full three seconds at empty intersection with camera: $100, doubled after 30 days

This is the utopia that GGW and the bike lane mafia has created.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's no way a cop said that. That would be wildly, wildly unprofessional.

Police friends have told me the same thing, both in DC and Baltimore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me remind everyone how traffic laws work in DC:

12 year old driving an ATV down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour: no penalty

Moped driver blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Motorcyclist blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Cyclist with infant placed in basket in front of bike: no penalty

Cyclist with two small children on back with no helmets: no penalty

Car driver going 50 mph in a 25 mph zone with no traffic cameras: no penalty

Car driver doesnt stop at stop sign for full three seconds at empty intersection with camera: $100, doubled after 30 days

“12 year old” ??

A “Juvenile offender” in DC is any criminal under the age of 26. No penalty for most crimes. No jail time. The 25 year-old criminal is simply released from police custody (into the recognizance of his parents).

You voted for that, DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me remind everyone how traffic laws work in DC:

12 year old driving an ATV down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour: no penalty

Moped driver blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Motorcyclist blowing stop sign at 40 mph: no penalty

Cyclist with infant placed in basket in front of bike: no penalty

Cyclist with two small children on back with no helmets: no penalty

Car driver going 50 mph in a 25 mph zone with no traffic cameras: no penalty

Car driver doesnt stop at stop sign for full three seconds at empty intersection with camera: $100, doubled after 30 days

This is a perfect summary. If there isn't an easy way to monetize the infractions using cameras, DC doesn't care about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no way a cop said that. That would be wildly, wildly unprofessional.

Police friends have told me the same thing, both in DC and Baltimore.

This is 100% true. Most police are good people doing it for the right reasons. But, post-George Floyd it’s an impossible job. And worse, the bad guys know it. In 2020 when my progressive neighbors dutifully stated putting up BLM signs we knew we had to move out of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no way a cop said that. That would be wildly, wildly unprofessional.

Obviously you don’t know many MPD officers. They’re fed up with your bullsh!t and the way you vote, and they’re giving you what you voted for.

I’ve heard this as a theme from most of the cops I know. It started after Micheal Brown and Freddie Gray, and then accelerated after George Floyd. They’re here to punch a clock now. To get paid and do as little as possible. They hate you (rightfully so) for electing the politicians that make their jobs impossible. So their goal is to do as little as possible and let you deal with the consequences of your vote.


Seriously, I cannot stress enough to you how much the average cop, black, white, brown or yellow, hates the average white UMC DC resident.

Can confirm.

[Anonymous]

Most of the dirt bikes and ATVs are stolen.

[Anonymous]

OP's story is not a case of police not doing their jobs. They are not allowed to pursue ATVs.

There is the low information voter on page 1 that said "I don't remember ATVs being on the ballot." But the candidates we voted for passed these laws that allows them to run the Indy 500 on our streets with no repercussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't recall ATVs being on a ballot? I don't recall a ballot measure saying police can't do the job either.

https://wtop.com/dc/2023/07/dc-council-passes-crime-bill-gives-police-green-light-for-high-speed-chases/

The bill clarifies that the police department can authorize officers to engage in pursuits when necessary.

The legislation retains “strict limits on pursuits,” allowing them only where the fleeing suspect has committed a crime of violence or poses an imminent threat to public safety and where pursuit is necessary and can be conducted in a way that mitigates the risk of injury to innocent people.

That sure seems to fit the circumstance OP is describing.