Cognitive Dissonance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

of course economic improvement is effective - as is improving schools/education, etc. but let's face it people are mostly rational actors. If they know they can commit a crime and get away with minimal or no consequences, some people will do it.

Then why is the death penalty not an effective deterrent? I don't think human behavior follows the logic you're thinking. It would be interesting to dive deeper into that difference.

Specious logic is specious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

of course economic improvement is effective - as is improving schools/education, etc. but let's face it people are mostly rational actors. If they know they can commit a crime and get away with minimal or no consequences, some people will do it.

Then why is the death penalty not an effective deterrent? I don't think human behavior follows the logic you're thinking. It would be interesting to dive deeper into that difference.

Specious logic is specious.

Yeah, why have punishments for anything? Obviously it doesn’t work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

Bing! Correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

Baloney. Don't take the kids away from the single mom. Lift the single mom from poverty. Rich single moms don't have this issue because $$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Please stop with the exaggerations. No one thinks (or wants) there were life sentences for carjacking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

Baloney. Don't take the kids away from the single mom. Lift the single mom from poverty. Rich single moms don't have this issue because $$.

If it were easy to lift a single mom from poverty, we'd just do it.

For the record, I support the efforts to simply provide universal basic income to people and that is a progressive experiment I would 100% back in DC (I know they've done it on a small scale, I would support expanding the program). It's not in the crime bill.

I still don't think we should reduce sentences for violent crimes like rape and carjacking just because we understand that cycles of poverty and racism that often lead to people engaging in criminal behavior. The reason why is that cycles of racism and poverty also make people more likely to become victims of violent crime. We can't forget about that side of the equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

Baloney. Don't take the kids away from the single mom. Lift the single mom from poverty. Rich single moms don't have this issue because $$.

If it were easy to lift a single mom from poverty, we'd just do it.

For the record, I support the efforts to simply provide universal basic income to people and that is a progressive experiment I would 100% back in DC (I know they've done it on a small scale, I would support expanding the program). It's not in the crime bill.

I still don't think we should reduce sentences for violent crimes like rape and carjacking just because we understand that cycles of poverty and racism that often lead to people engaging in criminal behavior. The reason why is that cycles of racism and poverty also make people more likely to become victims of violent crime. We can't forget about that side of the equation.

What is the right sentence for those crimes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

I worked with at risk youth in DC for many years. There are a not for profit etc 100 programs out there for the ones that want to walk a different path. However, I could not see ANY evidence that DC 'rehabilitates' youth while they are in government reform facilities. This is such a shame. It is a chance to provide structure, education, and wickets kids should 'meet' for release. Until Charles Allen explains what happens to the up to 26 year old 'kids' he is so hellbent to protect when the government has a chance to effectively change their path -- I cannot take him seriously.

[Anonymous]

Sorry I meant to say there are "100s of not for profit type programs"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

I worked with at risk youth in DC for many years. There are a not for profit etc 100 programs out there for the ones that want to walk a different path. However, I could not see ANY evidence that DC 'rehabilitates' youth while they are in government reform facilities. This is such a shame. It is a chance to provide structure, education, and wickets kids should 'meet' for release. Until Charles Allen explains what happens to the up to 26 year old 'kids' he is so hellbent to protect when the government has a chance to effectively change their path -- I cannot take him seriously.

Shouldn't we start with the Mayor who runs DYRS? Why is she and her people ineffective at it? What does she need from the council?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

Baloney. Don't take the kids away from the single mom. Lift the single mom from poverty. Rich single moms don't have this issue because $$.

Again, that is a platitude. Has been said for generations…as a platitude. How does that solve the immediate pressing problem of car jacking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

But this is one of the major criticisms of the bill. It does not take care of our safety.

I am all for addressing root causes of this leap in violent crime among minors. It's deeply concerning, and not just because it harms victims. Every time I hear about a 12 or 13 year old in my neighborhood getting arrested for carjacking, mugging, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc., my heart breaks because all outcomes are bad. The victim is harmed and traumatized, the minor who committed the crime is on a path that it will be very hard to get off of, that minor's family and friends will be impacted too. It's bad for small business owners. It's bad for neighbors who feel more afraid when they walk around the neighborhood. This crime wave is awful all around.

But why can't we invest in addressing root causes, via intervention programs, education, support for families, work programs, etc., while also recognizing that someone who is violently attacking and threatening people on the street needs to be taken off the streets, whatever the reasons they are doing it. I can have empathy for these kids who are doing this stuff and still understand that simply releasing them back onto the street is not going to make things better.

Addressing the root causes does not fix anything immediately. And people who are victimized by these crimes deserve to be protected and to feel confident that the people who hurt them won't be able to just go do it again tomorrow.

Also, before you tell me: yes, I understand that the provisions of the bill will be phased in over a number of years and that this bill that isn't even law yet is not at fault for the current crime wave. I am smarter than your average Republican Congressman, thankfully. But that doesn't mean there isn't a crime wave and that this feels like an extremely weird time to reduce criminal penalties for the precise crimes that are currently lowering the quality of life for peopel throughout the city. I literally don't drive at night anymore because of carjackings in my neighborhood, and the council wants to lower the sentence for carjacking and make it impossible to prosecute a minor who does it (and it's mostly minors who are carjacking in my neighborhood). It doesn't make sense.

People weren't/aren't going to jail for life for carjacking. How much was the maximum sentence being reduced?

I saw a summary of the tables for carjacking and the penalties were not light. It's not a free for all or decarceration experiment.

If you really want to be safer then why not work on diverting people before they carjack someone?

Because that’s fkng impossible.

What are you going to do? Take kids away from the single mom they’ve got,who can’t or won’t oversee the kid properly, and put them in a boarding school away from the blight of the neighborhood and bad peer influences they come from? No. You’re not because that’s been tried and is inhumane and doesn’t work. So you’ll just go around and around talking about we need to provide more services for ever.

When in reality, we need the services but we also need to arrest violent people and put them away or the city gets worse and tax base leaves and it’s 1991 and then finally we get tough on crime again and then blah blah the cycle happens again.

Baloney. Don't take the kids away from the single mom. Lift the single mom from poverty. Rich single moms don't have this issue because $$.

Again, that is a platitude. Has been said for generations…as a platitude. How does that solve the immediate pressing problem of car jacking?

It doesn't and neither do the police, which I'll remind you, are here and we'll funded.