Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Councilman Frumin’s crime meeting may have had the opposite affect.

https://wjla.com/news/local/vehicles-cars-broken-into-theft-break-in-stealing-overnight-northwest-washington-dc-cathedral-avenue-calvert-street-arrests-non-heartbroken-details#

From a comment "I have several extremely visible, fingerprints and handprints all over my vehicle and MPD won’t even come out"

So no finger print taking on victim's vehicles. If there were matches and prints in the system. But why bother since DC doesn't care. 15 years ago all along Wisconsin Ave you could go into Giants, Safeways, CVS etc and load body wash etc into baskets off shelves. Dove wasn't a prescription drug

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, private police force, sorry “security”. I’ll pay for it and a bunch of neighbors will.

South Africa, here we come.

But, I agree. When the government doesn’t do their job to prosecute criminals and keep them off the streets, citizens will start looking after themselves.

My husband has a background in this stuff. I told him he should open a decent security service in the district--not untrained people who stare at thieves as they loot the shelves- but the real thing offering decent neighborhood and home protection. Curious about the interest level. Best would be if neighbors/neighborhoods went in on it together, to bring down the cost. Is this something you would go in on with your street?

It was not uncommon in the 90s, I remember it in Georgetown and Lanier Heights. The issue is, back then, a witness was enough to deter crime. Now, crime happens under police cameras, in broad daylight, with witnesses (who recently have been shot at) and within sight of LE. So, would be a very different and more dangerous scenario now, "eyes on the street" is not enough.

The first time a private security person used force against a criminal, the full force of the law would come down on them like a ton of bricks. No restorative justice for them, no sir. The government is on the side of the criminals, not the law abiding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why people have car insurance

Yawn.

A comprehensive claim against your insurance for vandalism can cause a rate increase.

Literally NO ONE in Woodley Park is unable to afford a rate increase.


Yawn, AGAIN.

You have some funny ideas. There are plenty of “normal” people in Woodley who not only are struggling to pay to replace smashed windows but also will have to figure out how to pay for an increase in insurance. This idea that everyone who lives in a “nice” neighborhood is some schmo in a $4M house is absurd. We are renters in Woodley with two kids and one old car we park on the street. We are concerned. When the rich tax payers in our and neighboring hoods leave because they’ve had enough, when families who can barely afford rent and food finally realize it’s not worth it because the hood isn’t safe anymore, the entire city will go downhill and there will be no people left for you to hate or blame but yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-surge-resources-fight-violent-crime-washington-dc

American taxpayers footing the bill because DC government is incompetent.

Feds should put an income tax surcharge on every DC resident making more than $150k. They can afford to pay for this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, private police force, sorry “security”. I’ll pay for it and a bunch of neighbors will.

South Africa, here we come.

But, I agree. When the government doesn’t do their job to prosecute criminals and keep them off the streets, citizens will start looking after themselves.

My husband has a background in this stuff. I told him he should open a decent security service in the district--not untrained people who stare at thieves as they loot the shelves- but the real thing offering decent neighborhood and home protection. Curious about the interest level. Best would be if neighbors/neighborhoods went in on it together, to bring down the cost. Is this something you would go in on with your street?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to get a handle on this is “mass incarceration” of “juvenile offenders”—here meaning up to age 26 evidently—and this will never, ever happen. DC government has no interest in protecting crime victims, those in positions of authority on such matters care only about the offenders. This is not going to change anytime soon.

This is stupid. First, a mass incarceration of juvenile offenders until the age of 26 would be wickedly expensive and DC taxpayers would foot the bill. Second, it would do nothing to change criminal behavior and likely worsen an already bad situation. Numerous studies cite negative long-term effects of incarcertaion that include depression, substance use, homelessness, and loss of economic productivity. These have both direct financial and societal costs to DC and other communities.

Anonymous wrote:The only way to get a handle on this is “mass incarceration” of “juvenile offenders”—here meaning up to age 26 evidently—and this will never, ever happen. DC government has no interest in protecting crime victims, those in positions of authority on such matters care only about the offenders. This is not going to change anytime soon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, private police force, sorry “security”. I’ll pay for it and a bunch of neighbors will.

South Africa, here we come.

But, I agree. When the government doesn’t do their job to prosecute criminals and keep them off the streets, citizens will start looking after themselves.

I hope not. I was there when Jo’burg was the murder capital of the world.
It is no way to live, and everyone with the means was making plans to get out for good.

Violence just keeps escalating, if it goes unchecked. Every carjacking turns deadly. So you will defend yourself against assailants by any means necessary. Those who can’t, like the elderly, become prisoners by necessity. None of the laws are enforced anymore. It’s a spiral you can’t get a reprieve from.

Yes, you will have your privately guarded enclaves - private security with semi-automatic weapons and barbed wire and walls. It’s miserable. You want to go anywhere you need to organize a convoy. In between, what should be beautiful, it’s just piles of trash and decay. Snipers on rooftops. Everyone lost someone.

You don’t want all that, trust me.

Fund the police, fund the justice system. Enforce the laws, every time. Offer the social net and wrap around services, better, earlier, easier mental health care, etc. - but be tough on crime. Consequences for every offense. No 3rd chances. You go away for a long time. Involuntary commitment where needed. There’s a lot that can be done.

Anonymous wrote:For me that photo of them sticking a middle finger to a local business is all I’ve ever needed to see. Zero interest. We have self organized on physical barriers and neighborhood watch and looking into hiring a defunded cop. Also CC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, private police force, sorry “security”. I’ll pay for it and a bunch of neighbors will.

South Africa, here we come.

But, I agree. When the government doesn’t do their job to prosecute criminals and keep them off the streets, citizens will start looking after themselves.

My husband has a background in this stuff. I told him he should open a decent security service in the district--not untrained people who stare at thieves as they loot the shelves- but the real thing offering decent neighborhood and home protection. Curious about the interest level. Best would be if neighbors/neighborhoods went in on it together, to bring down the cost. Is this something you would go in on with your street?

It was not uncommon in the 90s, I remember it in Georgetown and Lanier Heights. The issue is, back then, a witness was enough to deter crime. Now, crime happens under police cameras, in broad daylight, with witnesses (who recently have been shot at) and within sight of LE. So, would be a very different and more dangerous scenario now, "eyes on the street" is not enough.