Crime Since National Guard Appeared

[Anonymous]

https://nypost.com/2025/11/12/us-news/jeanine-pirro-tells-pod-force-one-that-dcs-lax-crime-laws-must-be-axed/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One would have to record National Guard patrol areas, times vs crimes record in those pre, during and post National Guard. In addition you would have to account for the reduction of the number people visiting DC because of armed soldiers patrolling the streets. Less people less crime.

Now the National Guard does not go in to the areas where crime is high. They walk around the mall eating ice cream. NG can not do police work.

So why would there be an impact on crime?


Now let’s talk about the cost.

DC national guard has cost $201 million to September 16th alone. DC NG accounts for 36% of the force deployed. So somewhere north of $585 million for the other states NG.

Is it worth $780 million dollars the non existent results?

By the way, $780 million is enough money to give every DC resident living below the poverty line an $8,200 check. It's enough to give every single-parent household 6 months of free childcare. It's enough to house every homeless person and feed every hungry family for multiple years. It's enough to pay for 10 hours a week of private tutoring for every single DCPS student.

If you want to focus solely on reducing crime it's also enough to pay 5,200 extra cops for a year assuming a very generous $150k total comp.

It's unconscionable that we're wasting that kind of money on the National Guard just standing around.

A 100 percent reduction in the murder rate because the NG patrolling populated areas frees cops up to do their work is not a “waste of money.” I like less murders. Sorry if that is a controversial point in these hyperpoliticized times.

I did not, and would never, vote for Trump if that matters. But I also am not a delusional partisan hack.

I am also in favor of fewer murders.

Let’s compare approaches and how effective they are:

- National Guard: dramatic reduction; up to 100% reduction

- progressive “wrap around services:” epic failure; crime and murder went up.

But let’s be honest about WHO is being saved and who gets murdered in DC: overwhelmingly it’s young Black males who are the victims of homicide; 40 years of data is unquestionable. Which begs the question:

- do you hate young Black males and want them murdered?

Choose the approaches which save lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:15 murders from August 12, when the Guard appeared, to October 24. This is almost 6 murders a month. There were 100 murders this year before that, from January 1 to August 11.

Now that it’s about two and a half months in, is there any rational argument that the National Guard’s presence hasn’t brought crime down? Is there anyone operating in good faith that thinks crime has gone up since they started patrolling?

You don’t have to like Trump and don’t have to have voted for him to concede that this has worked.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/dailycrime

No it has not abd it’s not their job!!!

We don’t put any military on our soil to hurt Americans

This is not about crime in DC fool he’s going to use it to stop votes !!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One would have to record National Guard patrol areas, times vs crimes record in those pre, during and post National Guard. In addition you would have to account for the reduction of the number people visiting DC because of armed soldiers patrolling the streets. Less people less crime.

Now the National Guard does not go in to the areas where crime is high. They walk around the mall eating ice cream. NG can not do police work.

So why would there be an impact on crime?


Now let’s talk about the cost.

DC national guard has cost $201 million to September 16th alone. DC NG accounts for 36% of the force deployed. So somewhere north of $585 million for the other states NG.

Is it worth $780 million dollars the non existent results?

By the way, $780 million is enough money to give every DC resident living below the poverty line an $8,200 check. It's enough to give every single-parent household 6 months of free childcare. It's enough to house every homeless person and feed every hungry family for multiple years. It's enough to pay for 10 hours a week of private tutoring for every single DCPS student.

If you want to focus solely on reducing crime it's also enough to pay 5,200 extra cops for a year assuming a very generous $150k total comp.

It's unconscionable that we're wasting that kind of money on the National Guard just standing around.

A 100 percent reduction in the murder rate because the NG patrolling populated areas frees cops up to do their work is not a “waste of money.” I like less murders. Sorry if that is a controversial point in these hyperpoliticized times.

I did not, and would never, vote for Trump if that matters. But I also am not a delusional partisan hack.

A 100% reduction? So you're claiming that there have been zero murders in DC since the National Guard came in? Why would you even bother posting such an easily disprovable lie?

You dummy. She means the guard is responsible for a number of resurrections equal to the remaining murders so the net is a 100% reduction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://nypost.com/2025/11/12/us-news/jeanine-pirro-tells-pod-force-one-that-dcs-lax-crime-laws-must-be-axed/

She can't even get a prosecution. Our city is actually more dangerous b/c of her. All of the experienced prosecutors have quit so they are getting laughed out of court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
She can't even get a prosecution. Our city is actually more dangerous b/c of her. All of the experienced prosecutors have quit so they are getting laughed out of court.

Box Wine Janine is a threat to DC public safety

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is not about crime in DC fool he’s going to use it to stop votes !!!

How would this work, exactly?

[Anonymous]

They basically implemented what’s called “stop and Frisk” which has been studied and debunked as a good model for reducing crime.

Stop and frisk, mandatory minimum, three strikes you’re out, broken window theory… they’ve all shown to have a positive short term effect on crime, but extreme long-term negative affects.

You take a hard-working law, abiding immigrant, and throw them in jail for 76 days and then deport them to a country they don’t know… but you leave behind their 13 and 11 year-old children who now have no money, nobody encouraging them to stay in school, and trauma without a loving family around them… guess what you get when they turn 16 and 17… criminals.

[Anonymous]

They basically implemented what’s called “stop and Frisk” which has been studied and debunked as a good model for reducing crime.

Stop and frisk, mandatory minimum, three strikes you’re out, broken window theory… they’ve all shown to have a positive short term effect on crime, but extreme long-term negative affects.

You take a hard-working law, abiding immigrant, and throw them in jail for 76 days and then deport them to a country they don’t know… but you leave behind their 13 and 11 year-old children who now have no money, nobody encouraging them to stay in school, and trauma without a loving family around them… guess what you get when they turn 16 and 17… criminals.

There is a difference---nuanced but a definite difference---between "broken windows" theory and the failures of "stop & frisk". There is a great October podcast interviewing a longtime NYPD higher up about what policies have and have not worked since the 1990s. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/stop-and-frisk-didnt-work-this-did/id1772157676?i=1000731432940

Under "broken windows" the cops went after perps for low level crime ---such as fare jumping---because (surprise surprise) ---the criminals mugging people on the subway were also not paying to ride it. Unfortunately, as the podcast explains, that approach morphed into "stop & frisk" when precincts became more focused on juicing their statistics. In the same podcast, the guy interviewed had some interesting observations on how the local police forces could use the NG effectively to augment their efforts (e.g., securing crime scenes) even though overall he was opposed to the idea of just sending the NG into cities where they are unwanted.

IMO, I would be a lot happier with the NG presence if they did something productive like spend an evening coordinating with the police to stop all drivers of unregistered/licensed ATVs on city streets. The DC cops can stop them and the NG could be dumping the ATVs into a metal crusher. It would take one night of doing that to stop the ATV lawlessness, as none of these guys would want to lose their toys. I'd rather see that happen than ICE going after the poor immigrant Door Dash guys who are at least trying to make a living. The ATVers are just out to be obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They basically implemented what’s called “stop and Frisk” which has been studied and debunked as a good model for reducing crime.

Stop and frisk, mandatory minimum, three strikes you’re out, broken window theory… they’ve all shown to have a positive short term effect on crime, but extreme long-term negative affects.

You take a hard-working law, abiding immigrant, and throw them in jail for 76 days and then deport them to a country they don’t know… but you leave behind their 13 and 11 year-old children who now have no money, nobody encouraging them to stay in school, and trauma without a loving family around them… guess what you get when they turn 16 and 17… criminals.

There is a difference---nuanced but a definite difference---between "broken windows" theory and the failures of "stop & frisk". There is a great October podcast interviewing a longtime NYPD higher up about what policies have and have not worked since the 1990s. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/stop-and-frisk-didnt-work-this-did/id1772157676?i=1000731432940

Under "broken windows" the cops went after perps for low level crime ---such as fare jumping---because (surprise surprise) ---the criminals mugging people on the subway were also not paying to ride it. Unfortunately, as the podcast explains, that approach morphed into "stop & frisk" when precincts became more focused on juicing their statistics. In the same podcast, the guy interviewed had some interesting observations on how the local police forces could use the NG effectively to augment their efforts (e.g., securing crime scenes) even though overall he was opposed to the idea of just sending the NG into cities where they are unwanted.

IMO, I would be a lot happier with the NG presence if they did something productive like spend an evening coordinating with the police to stop all drivers of unregistered/licensed ATVs on city streets. The DC cops can stop them and the NG could be dumping the ATVs into a metal crusher. It would take one night of doing that to stop the ATV lawlessness, as none of these guys would want to lose their toys. I'd rather see that happen than ICE going after the poor immigrant Door Dash guys who are at least trying to make a living. The ATVers are just out to be obnoxious.

What would actually be effective is if the NG were mentoring young people, coaching them, having them shadow them at their jobs, giving them part time jobs etc. all the things being implemented in Baltimore right now.

[Anonymous]

Life on the Hill has been wonderful since implemented

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They basically implemented what’s called “stop and Frisk” which has been studied and debunked as a good model for reducing crime.

Stop and frisk, mandatory minimum, three strikes you’re out, broken window theory… they’ve all shown to have a positive short term effect on crime, but extreme long-term negative affects.

You take a hard-working law, abiding immigrant, and throw them in jail for 76 days and then deport them to a country they don’t know… but you leave behind their 13 and 11 year-old children who now have no money, nobody encouraging them to stay in school, and trauma without a loving family around them… guess what you get when they turn 16 and 17… criminals.

There is a difference---nuanced but a definite difference---between "broken windows" theory and the failures of "stop & frisk". There is a great October podcast interviewing a longtime NYPD higher up about what policies have and have not worked since the 1990s. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/stop-and-frisk-didnt-work-this-did/id1772157676?i=1000731432940

Under "broken windows" the cops went after perps for low level crime ---such as fare jumping---because (surprise surprise) ---the criminals mugging people on the subway were also not paying to ride it. Unfortunately, as the podcast explains, that approach morphed into "stop & frisk" when precincts became more focused on juicing their statistics. In the same podcast, the guy interviewed had some interesting observations on how the local police forces could use the NG effectively to augment their efforts (e.g., securing crime scenes) even though overall he was opposed to the idea of just sending the NG into cities where they are unwanted.

IMO, I would be a lot happier with the NG presence if they did something productive like spend an evening coordinating with the police to stop all drivers of unregistered/licensed ATVs on city streets. The DC cops can stop them and the NG could be dumping the ATVs into a metal crusher. It would take one night of doing that to stop the ATV lawlessness, as none of these guys would want to lose their toys. I'd rather see that happen than ICE going after the poor immigrant Door Dash guys who are at least trying to make a living. The ATVers are just out to be obnoxious.

What would actually be effective is if the NG were mentoring young people, coaching them, having them shadow them at their jobs, giving them part time jobs etc. all the things being implemented in Baltimore right now.

Agree, this is where DC is failing young at-risk people. They keep throwing money at failed programs. They should be having summer programs and after school programs to help boost literacy and other school skills, along with coaching them on life skills and steering them toward productive, useful pursuits rather than dealing drugs, robbing and other behaviors. Those programs should be mandatory for kids who are struggling, or who are getting in trouble. Are their parents/guardians going to complain? So what if they do, they are obviously already failing those kids, and if they don't like it, they need to step the F up and start doing some parenting.

[Anonymous]

Young people can join the National Guard at 18 to learn life skills and get paid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:15 murders from August 12, when the Guard appeared, to October 24. This is almost 6 murders a month. There were 100 murders this year before that, from January 1 to August 11.

Now that it’s about two and a half months in, is there any rational argument that the National Guard’s presence hasn’t brought crime down? Is there anyone operating in good faith that thinks crime has gone up since they started patrolling?

You don’t have to like Trump and don’t have to have voted for him to concede that this has worked.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/dailycrime

More government is never the answer. Sure, heavy handed presence will "reduce crime", but addressing the root CAUSE of the crime to begin with would solve it.

But nobody is interested in having that conversation, much less doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15 murders from August 12, when the Guard appeared, to October 24. This is almost 6 murders a month. There were 100 murders this year before that, from January 1 to August 11.

Now that it’s about two and a half months in, is there any rational argument that the National Guard’s presence hasn’t brought crime down? Is there anyone operating in good faith that thinks crime has gone up since they started patrolling?

You don’t have to like Trump and don’t have to have voted for him to concede that this has worked.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/dailycrime

More government is never the answer. Sure, heavy handed presence will "reduce crime", but addressing the root CAUSE of the crime to begin with would solve it.

But nobody is interested in having that conversation, much less doing it.

Criminals criminal because it’s easier than studying or working.