Reply to AP: Biden will not stop override of DC crime laws

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "AP: Biden will not stop override of DC crime laws"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]While I am a DC resident and would favor stronger home rule it's wild that THIS veto, all things is what's becoming the rallying cry.

I mean, the DC crime reform bill is objectively shitty.  Everyone living in DC is sick and tired of the lack of deterrence and that violent repeat offenders being continuously released back on the streets with a slap on the wrist.

This post in particular sums up my frustration - it's not the mandatory maximums, it's the lack of, and repeal of mandatory MINIMUMs.

https://twitter.com/JohnFubka/status/1631396148077273108[/quote]

Do you really not understand that violent repeat offenders are being continuously released not because of a lack of mandatory minimums or too short maximums, but because the AUSA - a federal agency - is not prosecuting and that one of the reasons for the lack of prosecutions is because of the complexity of DC’s outdated code? I’m not going to defend everything in the RCCA because I don’t agree with all of it (and no one does, just like every piece of consequential legislation) but you and many others on here - and a good chunk of our national politicians - have bought a cheap lie that completely misrepresents the RCCA bill and ultimately works against making DC safer.[/quote]

Can you cite some specific examples of how the new bill is fixing things for the AUSA?  And what does it serve to not have minimums?[/quote]

Sure. Simple assault. It’s not defined in the current code (see here: https://www.dccourts.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/Hernandez%20v%20US%2015-CM-130_0.pdf). You can understand how challenging it is to prosecute a charge when the offense is not defined. Kidnapping is another example.

Furthermore, few people seem to grasp that like-for-like comparisons of the old and the new (such as Fubka’s table that was linked) make little sense when offenses are redefined and enhancements are introduced. The new code allows judges to stack sentences and many offenders will end up with longer sentences than they do today. Even absent such enhancements, maximums for many offenses - such as attempted murder - are increased by the RCCA.

The reason, I suspect, that the RCCA has attracted such fury from certain right-wing commentators is that one of the enhancements it introduces is to distinguish between armed and unarmed offenses. Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you will understand how certain elements wouldn’t like that.

There are aspects of the RCCA that are problematic (such as the right to a jury trial for misdemeanors), but I’d much give the opportunity to the Council to fix those aspects (as Bowser wanted) between now and 2025 than to have to go through this all again, likely with the same misrepresentations put forth to bully people into opposing it.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics