Thanks Racine and Allen!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Juvenile offenders thoughts do not run so deep as to “sense that the city does not care about them”. The whole genesis of Racine’s proposal is that kids’ brains are not fully developed, so they certainly aren’t thinking as deeply as you suggest. What they sense is that there are few consequences for criminal behavior in DC so they take their teenage years as a crime freebie. Being committed to DYRS is a bit of street cred for many kids because they know that commitment doesn’t mean you will be locked away, you’ll generally still be at home with no supervision and running the streets.

Feel free to do a search of the kids between 16-17 in DC who have been charged as adults with murder, and then realize that under this proposal those kids would have been looking at a commitment to DYRS (which does not necessarily mean they will be detained) until a max of age 21. Here are some examples: the murderer of Neil Godleski in 2010, sniper Lee Malvo, one of the people charged with killing 10 year old Makiyah Wilson, and Maurice Bellamy who was convicted of murdering 2 people at age 17.

I disagree - I think people have a pretty good sense about when the city (or whichever) government doesn't care about them, whether or not they can articulate it.

It doesn't help that the Post and other left-leaning elite narrative makers constantly tell them that a) they can never get ahead because of racism, b) they are poor because of racism, and c) money and bling is the source of happiness.

Juvenile offenders read the Washington Post? Who knew?

not PP, but aside from your snide Post reading comment, do you not think the lives of juvenile offenders are shaped in any way by narrative makers - who quote obviously influence voter and policy decisions by anyone who does read the papers.

Can you point to some specific examples of where the "narrative making" Washington Post or other left leaning elites are saying it's OK for people to engage in violent crime and carjackings?

Yet more specific examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/nats-park-shooting-neighborhood/2021/07/21/6cb9a454-e987-11eb-8950-d73b3e93ff7f_story.html

Identifying with the crime perpetrators over the enormous good the gentrification of the last 20 years in SW has done. If people can’t afford the rent and can live there without gang warfare then they should move. The post always sides with the liberal bleeding heart cause.

You're right that they're always putting this spin on. They almost make it seem like you should just give away all of your possessions, and find a poor person to give your house to. I can't tell if the last year in DC is making me more conservative or so many people have lost their minds and just gone so far left that they're out in the wilderness like these Wapo writers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Juvenile offenders thoughts do not run so deep as to “sense that the city does not care about them”. The whole genesis of Racine’s proposal is that kids’ brains are not fully developed, so they certainly aren’t thinking as deeply as you suggest. What they sense is that there are few consequences for criminal behavior in DC so they take their teenage years as a crime freebie. Being committed to DYRS is a bit of street cred for many kids because they know that commitment doesn’t mean you will be locked away, you’ll generally still be at home with no supervision and running the streets.

Feel free to do a search of the kids between 16-17 in DC who have been charged as adults with murder, and then realize that under this proposal those kids would have been looking at a commitment to DYRS (which does not necessarily mean they will be detained) until a max of age 21. Here are some examples: the murderer of Neil Godleski in 2010, sniper Lee Malvo, one of the people charged with killing 10 year old Makiyah Wilson, and Maurice Bellamy who was convicted of murdering 2 people at age 17.

I disagree - I think people have a pretty good sense about when the city (or whichever) government doesn't care about them, whether or not they can articulate it.

It doesn't help that the Post and other left-leaning elite narrative makers constantly tell them that a) they can never get ahead because of racism, b) they are poor because of racism, and c) money and bling is the source of happiness.

Juvenile offenders read the Washington Post? Who knew?

not PP, but aside from your snide Post reading comment, do you not think the lives of juvenile offenders are shaped in any way by narrative makers - who quote obviously influence voter and policy decisions by anyone who does read the papers.

Can you point to some specific examples of where the "narrative making" Washington Post or other left leaning elites are saying it's OK for people to engage in violent crime and carjackings?

Yet more specific examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/nats-park-shooting-neighborhood/2021/07/21/6cb9a454-e987-11eb-8950-d73b3e93ff7f_story.html

Identifying with the crime perpetrators over the enormous good the gentrification of the last 20 years in SW has done. If people can’t afford the rent and can live there without gang warfare then they should move. The post always sides with the liberal bleeding heart cause.

You're right that they're always putting this spin on. They almost make it seem like you should just give away all of your possessions, and find a poor person to give your house to. I can't tell if the last year in DC is making me more conservative or so many people have lost their minds and just gone so far left that they're out in the wilderness like these Wapo writers.

I was literally just thinking this same thing. It’s as if I’ve become conservative, and I was always liberal and aghast during the Trump years the entire time, as some kind of uncontrollable, reflexive backlash against liberals ramming questionable social policy down my throat. Wether it’s their insistence that less policing, or at least less tough on crime policing, and allowing teens to get away with petty crime, is an acceptable goal toward achieving amorphous equity goals or all the other. I am basically a tax paying citizen in dc. I own property here. Where are the council members who are putting my interest first? They seem to kowtow to the poorest citizens who also happen to cause crime. I’m sorry to say that but it’s true. Like expect Charles Allen to do the exact opposite of what is recommended to be done during a time of rising crime. I also can’t stand the amount of woke scolding from the left. Not everything single issue is caused by systemic racism. Personal accountability is a big part of crime. Is it now racist to say that???? I feel like I can’t just say things that are plainly obvious and we all have to just contend with rising crime and then point to a lack of funding or lack of programs or lack of this or that when really just stop fking committing crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Juvenile offenders thoughts do not run so deep as to “sense that the city does not care about them”. The whole genesis of Racine’s proposal is that kids’ brains are not fully developed, so they certainly aren’t thinking as deeply as you suggest. What they sense is that there are few consequences for criminal behavior in DC so they take their teenage years as a crime freebie. Being committed to DYRS is a bit of street cred for many kids because they know that commitment doesn’t mean you will be locked away, you’ll generally still be at home with no supervision and running the streets.

Feel free to do a search of the kids between 16-17 in DC who have been charged as adults with murder, and then realize that under this proposal those kids would have been looking at a commitment to DYRS (which does not necessarily mean they will be detained) until a max of age 21. Here are some examples: the murderer of Neil Godleski in 2010, sniper Lee Malvo, one of the people charged with killing 10 year old Makiyah Wilson, and Maurice Bellamy who was convicted of murdering 2 people at age 17.

I disagree - I think people have a pretty good sense about when the city (or whichever) government doesn't care about them, whether or not they can articulate it.

It doesn't help that the Post and other left-leaning elite narrative makers constantly tell them that a) they can never get ahead because of racism, b) they are poor because of racism, and c) money and bling is the source of happiness.

Juvenile offenders read the Washington Post? Who knew?

not PP, but aside from your snide Post reading comment, do you not think the lives of juvenile offenders are shaped in any way by narrative makers - who quote obviously influence voter and policy decisions by anyone who does read the papers.

Can you point to some specific examples of where the "narrative making" Washington Post or other left leaning elites are saying it's OK for people to engage in violent crime and carjackings?

Yet more specific examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/nats-park-shooting-neighborhood/2021/07/21/6cb9a454-e987-11eb-8950-d73b3e93ff7f_story.html

Identifying with the crime perpetrators over the enormous good the gentrification of the last 20 years in SW has done. If people can’t afford the rent and can live there without gang warfare then they should move. The post always sides with the liberal bleeding heart cause.

You're right that they're always putting this spin on. They almost make it seem like you should just give away all of your possessions, and find a poor person to give your house to. I can't tell if the last year in DC is making me more conservative or so many people have lost their minds and just gone so far left that they're out in the wilderness like these Wapo writers.

I was literally just thinking this same thing. It’s as if I’ve become conservative, and I was always liberal and aghast during the Trump years the entire time, as some kind of uncontrollable, reflexive backlash against liberals ramming questionable social policy down my throat. Wether it’s their insistence that less policing, or at least less tough on crime policing, and allowing teens to get away with petty crime, is an acceptable goal toward achieving amorphous equity goals or all the other. I am basically a tax paying citizen in dc. I own property here. Where are the council members who are putting my interest first? They seem to kowtow to the poorest citizens who also happen to cause crime. I’m sorry to say that but it’s true. Like expect Charles Allen to do the exact opposite of what is recommended to be done during a time of rising crime. I also can’t stand the amount of woke scolding from the left. Not everything single issue is caused by systemic racism. Personal accountability is a big part of crime. Is it now racist to say that???? I feel like I can’t just say things that are plainly obvious and we all have to just contend with rising crime and then point to a lack of funding or lack of programs or lack of this or that when really just stop fking committing crimes.

I feel the same way and I guarantee there are a lot more in DC starting to feel this way. We have to coalesce around some sensible policies and back some candidates that are reasonable on these issues. The far left is way too emboldened right now, and think everyone agrees with them. There used to be a more moderate counterbalance in DC, but like you said the far left are trying to wield accusations of racism like a weapon to push all of their policies through. It's had a chilling affect on dissent and people willing to stand up to some of the more outrageous plans.

[Anonymous]

Crime is up, yet again. It just keeps getting worse.

These two men are the unwanted “gifts” which keep on giving!

[Anonymous]

Anything to keep the heat off Bowser in an election year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The car crimes and the gun violence need to be addressed. DC went all petty crime friendly, but car crime (theft, jacking etc) and gun violence (three people shot yesterday) must be addressed. Instead car crime is called "property crime" and gun charges are routinely pled down. And yes, if you are convicted Allen's life mission is you are quickly released with zero rehab.

Wasn't this the Giuliani /broken windows theory though? If you don't hold the line at petty crime (turnstile jumping, smoking blunts and blowing smoke in babies' faces) maybe you are missing the chance to intervene before things escalate? I don't mean go all ape*t, but maybe we have gotten too petty crime friendly. Also, what rehabilitation do we actually offer under the youth rehabilitation act? Or is that just a pretty name for, "we won't keep you long"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with you OP. I think treating juvenile offenders as adults in DC has led to a sense of nihilism among a lot of young people in DC. They sense (correctly) that the city does not care about them or what happens to them, so they embrace criminal activity because they don't see the point in following rules that are designed to protect everyone BUT them and their communities.

Many juvenile criminal offenders in DC have spent their entire lives in a city that sends them to substandard schools, neglects their neighborhoods, and focuses all the city's economic growth on wealthy, mostly white, college graduates. And then they wind up in adult prisons because of drug and gang activity they engage in as teenagers. It really is a school to prison pipeline and we are treating these kids as though they never had a shot at a different kind of life. Keeping them out of adult jails and prison populations is a small but important step to interrupting that pipeline.

Do you really think punishing juvenile offenders more severely is going to have a deterrent effect for young people in this city growing up with poor educational and career options? All it does is expose them to more violent, adult prison populations at a younger age. That doesn't help.

Juvenile offenders thoughts do not run so deep as to “sense that the city does not care about them”. The whole genesis of Racine’s proposal is that kids’ brains are not fully developed, so they certainly aren’t thinking as deeply as you suggest. What they sense is that there are few consequences for criminal behavior in DC so they take their teenage years as a crime freebie. Being committed to DYRS is a bit of street cred for many kids because they know that commitment doesn’t mean you will be locked away, you’ll generally still be at home with no supervision and running the streets.

Feel free to do a search of the kids between 16-17 in DC who have been charged as adults with murder, and then realize that under this proposal those kids would have been looking at a commitment to DYRS (which does not necessarily mean they will be detained) until a max of age 21. Here are some examples: the murderer of Neil Godleski in 2010, sniper Lee Malvo, one of the people charged with killing 10 year old Makiyah Wilson, and Maurice Bellamy who was convicted of murdering 2 people at age 17.

Which tree in Sherman circle is the Neil godleski tree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The car crimes and the gun violence need to be addressed. DC went all petty crime friendly, but car crime (theft, jacking etc) and gun violence (three people shot yesterday) must be addressed. Instead car crime is called "property crime" and gun charges are routinely pled down. And yes, if you are convicted Allen's life mission is you are quickly released with zero rehab.

this, in a nutshell.

Curious what all the folks who are upset about the cumulative effect of 2-3 years of nutty policies are actually doing though. Do you pick up the phone and call your CouncilMembers office? I've called Allen even as a non-ward-constituent. Yes, I got talked down to by the aide about how Allen is not soft on rape (and yet he scolds judges that they should not consider 'the nature' of crimes like rape and murder committed before 26 when considering early release). But at least my calls were logged.

How about we compile what we can do constructively to combat this madness, and then we ALL DO IT? I'll go--
Here is the link to City Council. Burn up their phones and emails!

https://dccouncil.gov/councilmembers/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with you OP. I think treating juvenile offenders as adults in DC has led to a sense of nihilism among a lot of young people in DC. They sense (correctly) that the city does not care about them or what happens to them, so they embrace criminal activity because they don't see the point in following rules that are designed to protect everyone BUT them and their communities.

Many juvenile criminal offenders in DC have spent their entire lives in a city that sends them to substandard schools, neglects their neighborhoods, and focuses all the city's economic growth on wealthy, mostly white, college graduates. And then they wind up in adult prisons because of drug and gang activity they engage in as teenagers. It really is a school to prison pipeline and we are treating these kids as though they never had a shot at a different kind of life. Keeping them out of adult jails and prison populations is a small but important step to interrupting that pipeline.

Do you really think punishing juvenile offenders more severely is going to have a deterrent effect for young people in this city growing up with poor educational and career options? All it does is expose them to more violent, adult prison populations at a younger age. That doesn't help.

How about some effective consequences when juvenile offenders throw chairs at their teachers (or mothers!) in the third grade? When you keep ignoring criminal behavior when these kids are young, what exactly do you expect when they’re a bit older????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The car crimes and the gun violence need to be addressed. DC went all petty crime friendly, but car crime (theft, jacking etc) and gun violence (three people shot yesterday) must be addressed. Instead car crime is called "property crime" and gun charges are routinely pled down. And yes, if you are convicted Allen's life mission is you are quickly released with zero rehab.

this, in a nutshell.

Curious what all the folks who are upset about the cumulative effect of 2-3 years of nutty policies are actually doing though. Do you pick up the phone and call your CouncilMembers office? I've called Allen even as a non-ward-constituent. Yes, I got talked down to by the aide about how Allen is not soft on rape (and yet he scolds judges that they should not consider 'the nature' of crimes like rape and murder committed before 26 when considering early release). But at least my calls were logged.

How about we compile what we can do constructively to combat this madness, and then we ALL DO IT? I'll go--
Here is the link to City Council. Burn up their phones and emails!

https://dccouncil.gov/councilmembers/

Sure, but do you really believe your politicians are working for you? They aren’t. That’s why they consistently lie through their teeth, right to your face. For God’s sake, just look at our President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with you OP. I think treating juvenile offenders as adults in DC has led to a sense of nihilism among a lot of young people in DC. They sense (correctly) that the city does not care about them or what happens to them, so they embrace criminal activity because they don't see the point in following rules that are designed to protect everyone BUT them and their communities.

Many juvenile criminal offenders in DC have spent their entire lives in a city that sends them to substandard schools, neglects their neighborhoods, and focuses all the city's economic growth on wealthy, mostly white, college graduates. And then they wind up in adult prisons because of drug and gang activity they engage in as teenagers. It really is a school to prison pipeline and we are treating these kids as though they never had a shot at a different kind of life. Keeping them out of adult jails and prison populations is a small but important step to interrupting that pipeline.

Do you really think punishing juvenile offenders more severely is going to have a deterrent effect for young people in this city growing up with poor educational and career options? All it does is expose them to more violent, adult prison populations at a younger age. That doesn't help.

How about some effective consequences when juvenile offenders throw chairs at their teachers (or mothers!) in the third grade? When you keep ignoring criminal behavior when these kids are young, what exactly do you expect when they’re a bit older????

So what’s your solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Juvenile offenders thoughts do not run so deep as to “sense that the city does not care about them”. The whole genesis of Racine’s proposal is that kids’ brains are not fully developed, so they certainly aren’t thinking as deeply as you suggest. What they sense is that there are few consequences for criminal behavior in DC so they take their teenage years as a crime freebie. Being committed to DYRS is a bit of street cred for many kids because they know that commitment doesn’t mean you will be locked away, you’ll generally still be at home with no supervision and running the streets.

Feel free to do a search of the kids between 16-17 in DC who have been charged as adults with murder, and then realize that under this proposal those kids would have been looking at a commitment to DYRS (which does not necessarily mean they will be detained) until a max of age 21. Here are some examples: the murderer of Neil Godleski in 2010, sniper Lee Malvo, one of the people charged with killing 10 year old Makiyah Wilson, and Maurice Bellamy who was convicted of murdering 2 people at age 17.

I disagree - I think people have a pretty good sense about when the city (or whichever) government doesn't care about them, whether or not they can articulate it.

It doesn't help that the Post and other left-leaning elite narrative makers constantly tell them that a) they can never get ahead because of racism, b) they are poor because of racism, and c) money and bling is the source of happiness.

Juvenile offenders read the Washington Post? Who knew?

not PP, but aside from your snide Post reading comment, do you not think the lives of juvenile offenders are shaped in any way by narrative makers - who quote obviously influence voter and policy decisions by anyone who does read the papers.

Can you point to some specific examples of where the "narrative making" Washington Post or other left leaning elites are saying it's OK for people to engage in violent crime and carjackings?

Yet more specific examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/nats-park-shooting-neighborhood/2021/07/21/6cb9a454-e987-11eb-8950-d73b3e93ff7f_story.html

Identifying with the crime perpetrators over the enormous good the gentrification of the last 20 years in SW has done. If people can’t afford the rent and can live there without gang warfare then they should move. The post always sides with the liberal bleeding heart cause.

You're right that they're always putting this spin on. They almost make it seem like you should just give away all of your possessions, and find a poor person to give your house to. I can't tell if the last year in DC is making me more conservative or so many people have lost their minds and just gone so far left that they're out in the wilderness like these Wapo writers.

I was literally just thinking this same thing. It’s as if I’ve become conservative, and I was always liberal and aghast during the Trump years the entire time, as some kind of uncontrollable, reflexive backlash against liberals ramming questionable social policy down my throat. Wether it’s their insistence that less policing, or at least less tough on crime policing, and allowing teens to get away with petty crime, is an acceptable goal toward achieving amorphous equity goals or all the other. I am basically a tax paying citizen in dc. I own property here. Where are the council members who are putting my interest first? They seem to kowtow to the poorest citizens who also happen to cause crime. I’m sorry to say that but it’s true. Like expect Charles Allen to do the exact opposite of what is recommended to be done during a time of rising crime. I also can’t stand the amount of woke scolding from the left. Not everything single issue is caused by systemic racism. Personal accountability is a big part of crime. Is it now racist to say that???? I feel like I can’t just say things that are plainly obvious and we all have to just contend with rising crime and then point to a lack of funding or lack of programs or lack of this or that when really just stop fking committing crimes.

I feel the same way and I guarantee there are a lot more in DC starting to feel this way. We have to coalesce around some sensible policies and back some candidates that are reasonable on these issues. The far left is way too emboldened right now, and think everyone agrees with them. There used to be a more moderate counterbalance in DC, but like you said the far left are trying to wield accusations of racism like a weapon to push all of their policies through. It's had a chilling affect on dissent and people willing to stand up to some of the more outrageous plans.

There have been some each election cycle, but we are going to need ranked voting to push them through. How do we make that happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with you OP. I think treating juvenile offenders as adults in DC has led to a sense of nihilism among a lot of young people in DC. They sense (correctly) that the city does not care about them or what happens to them, so they embrace criminal activity because they don't see the point in following rules that are designed to protect everyone BUT them and their communities.

Many juvenile criminal offenders in DC have spent their entire lives in a city that sends them to substandard schools, neglects their neighborhoods, and focuses all the city's economic growth on wealthy, mostly white, college graduates. And then they wind up in adult prisons because of drug and gang activity they engage in as teenagers. It really is a school to prison pipeline and we are treating these kids as though they never had a shot at a different kind of life. Keeping them out of adult jails and prison populations is a small but important step to interrupting that pipeline.

Do you really think punishing juvenile offenders more severely is going to have a deterrent effect for young people in this city growing up with poor educational and career options? All it does is expose them to more violent, adult prison populations at a younger age. That doesn't help.

How about some effective consequences when juvenile offenders throw chairs at their teachers (or mothers!) in the third grade? When you keep ignoring criminal behavior when these kids are young, what exactly do you expect when they’re a bit older????

So what’s your solution?

No one is currently being exposed to violent, more adult populations. So does DYRS DO? Looks good on paper (https://dyrs.dc.gov/), but doesn't seem to be working. Who/ what is the oversight??

It's nothing to do with severe. Youth criminals, according to their advocates, 'haven't finished growing". So they should stay in until they come out with some productive educational, job and behavioral skills. I'd like to see the Allens of the DC speak to ensuring this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Crime is up, yet again. It just keeps getting worse.

These two men are the unwanted “gifts” which keep on giving!

Well at least we got rid of one. Too bad the other one ran unopposed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:High-speed police chases in cities are dangerous, for reasons that should be immediately obvious to anyone.

Crime is dangerous to all the innocent crime victims.

Is that not immediately obvious to you?