Is a liberal city council soft on crime or are the recent bills justified?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| I’d like to preface this by saying I empathize with anyone out of work or experiencing homelessness or poverty. However, carjackings and crime is skyrocketing in DC. At the same time, the city Council has passed a bill to allow violent offenders who committed crimes before the age of 25 to be eligible for early release after 15 years of served time. We also saw Councilman Charles Allen and others pass the youth rehabilitation act, which honestly seems like we are encouraging slap on the wrist justice. Then you have a whole movement in the city of “don’t call the police if you see something that might not merit calling the police” because of the history of black offenders being killed disproportionately by the police. I don’t know how to square this whole thing. At what point will the police just step back and say hey this is what you voted for. I’ve lived in DC for my whole life. I’ve seen it since the berry years were nothing functioned and crime was out of control and we have the highest murder rate in America. We now have tons of new development, but we still have ingrained poverty, however this movement for police reform coupled with Wolka culture, I just don’t know if we’re going to see a retrogression to the crime levels of the 80’s. |
Anonymous
Sorry I meant woke culture. I was just voice dictating this message on my phone. |
Anonymous
|
“At what point will the police step back and say hey this is what you voted for?”
Never. Ha, do you know any police? They are so hungry for power. NYPD did go on strike but it was a failure for them. I sympathize with your concerns because poverty=crime and if people don’t do something about poverty then crime will continue regardless, but the idea that harsh sentences and stronger police presence reduces crime isn’t necessarily true. Violent crimes went down when NYPD went on strike, and when we slap somebody with a felony, it makes it harder for them to get out of poverty. Recidivism rates are high. I don’t know exactly how these laws are impacting crime rates but the way we do things now is wrong. |
Anonymous
|
1) 15 years is not a slap on the wrist.
2) No one will be released without having proven to a judge that they're rehabilitated. So do you think DC judges can't be trusted? If so, please address the specifics of the judiciary's ability to rule on this. Finding a way forward for people who have matured and been rehabilitated to be released and take up a useful role in society - that's about reducing crime, not increasing it. But the key thing is to stop assuming this is somehow about going and opening up the prison doors and letting out anyone who wants to go. People have to apply. They can only apply after being incarcerated 15 years. A judge has to rule on their case. It's not easy. |
Anonymous
|
15 years in prison is not a "slap on the wrist."
I don't know all the details of the crime bills, but I do know that our general approach of increasing the severity of sentences isn't the only, or even the most effective way to address crime. Research has shown that a shorter sentence, imposed quickly and surely, is the most effective deterrent. That means that police need to solve crimes efficiently. And part of that involves having the trust of the communities they are supposed to be protecting, which they don't have if people are scared of the cops because they harass people, or see them as violent oppressors who can beat and kill with impunity. So some reform is clearly necessary. And things like drug courts and diversions can be useful ways of dealing with low-level offenses, rather than crowding our jails and prisons with non-violent offenders. We also need the services to deal with people who use drugs, have mental illnesses, and/or are homeless. Then the police might actually be able to focus on preventing and solving violent crimes. Like I said, I don't know the details of the current crime bills. But in general, I think we need to put more work into crime prevention and rehabilitation -- most prisoners get out, and need help reintegrating into society. Just focusing on more and more punishment doesn't address the problem. |
Anonymous
It most certainly *is* a slap on the wrist for, among other things, - violent, armed home invasion - kidnapping - child rape - assault with intent to kill - 1st degree murder |
Anonymous
Therein lies the crux of the progressive argument: - racism and capitalism cause poverty - poverty causes crime Therefore, so-called criminals are actually victims, and the real criminals are racist white male capitalists. Of course, this analysis treats criminals -- especially black ones -- as inert objects devoid of any responsibility for their actions. |
Anonymous
|
Closure rates on murders have hovered around 60-70% the last five years. Chance you walk when you get a jury trail in DC? And then you only see 15 years.
Allen's a fool but you elected him and you'll do it again. Worst part is that while you'll scream fairness murders in DC are almost 100% black on black so by defunding police and being soft on crime you're actually hurting those you're trying to help. |
Anonymous
First, you don't see "only" 15 years for a murder case. Thirty years is the low end of the sentencing range for first degree murder. I do not know the details of this bill. But if a young person can, 15 years later, show that they are rehabilitated and get released onto a supervised release program safely, it does not help any community or person to pay for them to be in jail for an additional fifteen years. And please stop with the "black on black" business. In white communities and households, murders are "white on white," because murder usually happen within a community or household. Fairness is right in every community. What could possible be wrong with "fairness"? Don't you want fairness? |
Anonymous
|
1. DC is now 48% black.
2. Allen says that of the 52 released none ,not a single individual, has committed a crime. Sure Jan. |
Anonymous
There are organization that track this info. |
Anonymous
And yet, mysteriously, the “tough on crime” policies of the 1990’s were followed by 20 years of declining crime rates. Even in the face of two recessions. Fortunately I don’t have a dog in this fight. Crime & quality of life concerns led me to sell my DC house this year. You couldn’t pay me to live there anymore. |
Anonymous
|
Dc will be baltimore soon. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. First businesses leave to stop dealing with the crime and high taxes. People leave next because of crime, high taxes, and high cost of living. Property then plummets. Taxes keep going up to stop the bleeding. Crime continues to spiral out of control. The problem snowballs until DC is a shell of its former self like Baltimore.
Very stupid idea to release violent offenders. That's the worst type to release. DC will reap what is has sown by allowing the far left to dominate the discussion and politics. DC is no longer a desirable place to live or visit. I won't be spending my money any time soon that'd help the economy until the city gets crime under control. |
Anonymous
| DC has always been soft on crime |
Anonymous
+1 |