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.

Do their parents care about them?

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Do you think your life is shaped by the narrative makers?

Anonymous wrote:Out-of-wedlock birth creates criminals. You can be as nice as you want and it isn't going to change a damn thing. All it does is to delay the inevitable. Better for DC to create group homes for these children where they'll be guaranteed to get adequate rest and an education. As it stands they don't get either one. So let's stop playing and get about fixing the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was born and raised in south east and have seen this terrible and sad parenting style first hand. Yes, there is some incredible cruelty in impoverished parenting. Also, the whole idea of a “whupping” being okay needs to stop.

That said, yes the problem is intractable. It’s getting worse because everyone is too scared to offend another culture by pointing too closely. Also, the whole criminal justice reform movement is hitting smack dab into rising crime. So basically yea. Nothing can be done. Except in 15 years when it’s been too much and we go back to the 1990’s style of policing, which destroyed some families but worked to stop crime.

Because it's ok to break some eggs to make omelets, as long as it's your omelets but other people's eggs?

I’m pretty sure the families of those who have been murdered by some of DCs 16-17 year olds would say they have been destroyed too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was born and raised in south east and have seen this terrible and sad parenting style first hand. Yes, there is some incredible cruelty in impoverished parenting. Also, the whole idea of a “whupping” being okay needs to stop.

That said, yes the problem is intractable. It’s getting worse because everyone is too scared to offend another culture by pointing too closely. Also, the whole criminal justice reform movement is hitting smack dab into rising crime. So basically yea. Nothing can be done. Except in 15 years when it’s been too much and we go back to the 1990’s style of policing, which destroyed some families but worked to stop crime.

Because it's ok to break some eggs to make omelets, as long as it's your omelets but other people's eggs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was born and raised in south east and have seen this terrible and sad parenting style first hand. Yes, there is some incredible cruelty in impoverished parenting. Also, the whole idea of a “whupping” being okay needs to stop.

That said, yes the problem is intractable. It’s getting worse because everyone is too scared to offend another culture by pointing too closely. Also, the whole criminal justice reform movement is hitting smack dab into rising crime. So basically yea. Nothing can be done. Except in 15 years when it’s been too much and we go back to the 1990’s style of policing, which destroyed some families but worked to stop crime.

Because it's ok to break some eggs to make omelets, as long as it's your omelets but other people's eggs?

You are the problem. And your attitude is spreading like wildfire across the nation. I guess we just get live with increased crime and murders as penance for past inequities or some such bs. We shouldn’t police people. We shouldn’t incarcerate. Even with a 40% increase in crime and violence. Let’s just keep doling our money for school and jobs and all the rest, but ignore the punishment piece.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was born and raised in south east and have seen this terrible and sad parenting style first hand. Yes, there is some incredible cruelty in impoverished parenting. Also, the whole idea of a “whupping” being okay needs to stop.

That said, yes the problem is intractable. It’s getting worse because everyone is too scared to offend another culture by pointing too closely. Also, the whole criminal justice reform movement is hitting smack dab into rising crime. So basically yea. Nothing can be done. Except in 15 years when it’s been too much and we go back to the 1990’s style of policing, which destroyed some families but worked to stop crime.

Because it's ok to break some eggs to make omelets, as long as it's your omelets but other people's eggs?

Anonymous wrote:

I was born and raised in south east and have seen this terrible and sad parenting style first hand. Yes, there is some incredible cruelty in impoverished parenting. Also, the whole idea of a “whupping” being okay needs to stop.

That said, yes the problem is intractable. It’s getting worse because everyone is too scared to offend another culture by pointing too closely. Also, the whole criminal justice reform movement is hitting smack dab into rising crime. So basically yea. Nothing can be done. Except in 15 years when it’s been too much and we go back to the 1990’s style of policing, which destroyed some families but worked to stop crime.

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.

I've lived for 25 years in the neighborhoods where the juvenile offenders take root. I've observed something different. First, many of these kids are born to teenagers and single parents, often with substance abuse and mental issues of their own. From birth they are either ignored, or yelled at by their mothers. You seem them being yanked around the supermarket, screamed at, and then told to "Shut Up". The neglect comes not from the city and its "poor" schools, but from their own parents. By the time they are 5-6 years old, they are intellectually stunted, angry, and antisocial. Most attempts to rehabilitate them after they reach adolescence are pretty much a lost cause. So no - giving juvenile offenders a m 3rd and 4th chance doesn't do anyone any good. If they've gone so far as to commit violent crimes, they should be locked up for a good long time.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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.