Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When crime involving innocent victims was a fraction of what it is now, Tony Williams went on the warpath with big gestures to let the criminal underclass know things have changed and to cut that sh out.

Our current leadership coddles the criminals.

The leaders know that these armed thieves are just hungry, tired, misunderstood, and downtrodden souls who have so much potential that it's not fair to punish them and ruin their lives.

Anonymous wrote:When crime involving innocent victims was a fraction of what it is now, Tony Williams went on the warpath with big gestures to let the criminal underclass know things have changed and to cut that sh out.

Our current leadership coddles the criminals.

Anonymous wrote:When crime involving innocent victims was a fraction of what it is now, Tony Williams went on the warpath with big gestures to let the criminal underclass know things have changed and to cut that sh out.

Our current leadership coddles the criminals.

Anonymous wrote:Remember, it's all our fault! We shouldn't wear nice things, we shouldn't drive cars, we should have everything tracked by airtags so these criminals can have their freedom from oppression and jail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marines can not patrol DC streets (illegal) but national guard could. I think random roadblocks would be amazing. Especially near the big corridors, capitol hill, western Ave and other "escape routes" and hotspots

I think it's time for the national guard at this point.

We already had a major court case about the road blocks. They’re unconstitutional.

https://www.justiceonline.org/court_dcs_trinidad_checkpoints_not_legal

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marines can not patrol DC streets (illegal) but national guard could. I think random roadblocks would be amazing. Especially near the big corridors, capitol hill, western Ave and other "escape routes" and hotspots

I think it's time for the national guard at this point.

We already had a major court case about the road blocks. They’re unconstitutional.

https://www.justiceonline.org/court_dcs_trinidad_checkpoints_not_legal

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

This is just empirically untrue. Do you really believe this?

NP. How on earth could you believe this??? You think their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior??? If nothing else have you never heard of white collar crime??

The goalposts were shifted. My claim was that progressives view poor people as oppressed. A progressive confirmed this, so we don't need to debate that. My next claim was that, as critical theorists, progressives view the poor as victims whose illegal actions should be viewed as justice rather than crimes. I made no claims about the reasons poor people commit more crime but clearly they do. You would have to be a science and data-denier to say otherwise. Since you know that's a losing argument you've now shifted to "their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior" yet no one made that claim.

Hmm. You said that it is empirically untrue that poor people are not more criminal by nature. That means you think it is empirically true that poor people are more criminal by nature. How is that different from "their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

You've clearly never been poor. I have and poor people are far more prone to criminal activity than middle and upper class folks. Any crime map or crime statistics will tell you this. As a progressive, you are living in the land of make-believe where "data is white supremacy" so you're not allowed to use it. So you are incapable of solving this issue.

NP. What a load of bullshit and excuses.

My parents were both very poor immigrants from poor families on different continents. My father was homeless during much of his childhood. Other than taking food sometimes as a child in the 3rd world, he never stole a thing in his life, and we were raised to do/believe the same.

And upper/middle class people steal all the time, just more sneakily, and white collar, and through legal loopholes. Your SEC does not determine how much more prone to criminal activity you are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not new. It used to be Northface jackets they would steal. Now parents are dumb enough to buy their kids $900+ jackets.

If you’re stupid enough to buy a $900 piece of clothing for a kid who will outgrow it in 6 months, you probably SHOULD be getting robbed. Regularly.

They were already robbed once when they bought it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

You've clearly never been poor. I have and poor people are far more prone to criminal activity than middle and upper class folks. Any crime map or crime statistics will tell you this. As a progressive, you are living in the land of make-believe where "data is white supremacy" so you're not allowed to use it. So you are incapable of solving this issue.

I've been poor, with zero resources, and I didn't go robbing people.

Anonymous wrote:Like carjackings I expect Mayor Muriel Bowser to announce a new program that will provide free tracking Apple air tags for residents to put on their coats, making them easier to locate if they get stolen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Canada goose without the red label. (Kind of like this) Am I safe?

Would you wear a diamond ring in El Salvador? Would you wear your Rolex in Manila? Would you wear giant gold chains in Tijuana?

If the answer is no to those, then why would you wear similar kinds of stuff in DC, which is basically a sister city to those aforementioned places?