Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

Yeah, as of 2023 we are thing things your way, and all over the country progressive criminal justice policy efforts have been implemented and are being soundly rejected because they exacerbate crime. Your post is too full of platitudes about how things “should be” and doesn’t tackle with any immediacy getting crime under contol. Like I said I know your make. I accurately describes your approach to crime in general in my earlier posts.

My forecast is we, as a country, oversteer toward a harsher crackdown on crime in a few years when all these leniency policies fail. I wouldn’t surprised if we get another Bill Clinton style crime bill. Really throughout history prison has shown itself to get violent criminals away from the public. It’s not rocket science. It’s a lot more a concrete solution that proposing we push “hope for the future”. Which is great, but really with car jackings every day, doesn’t do much now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

of course economic improvement is effective - as is improving schools/education, etc. but let's face it people are mostly rational actors. If they know they can commit a crime and get away with minimal or no consequences, some people will do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Why do you think that teen is doing that?

The racists (I'm not accusing you) don't care. Just lock them up. And keep locking them up until our problem is solved.

Alternatively: let's take care of your safety, which is important, while also addressing root causes. It's not easy and I don't expect it to be quick or perfect. But that's what I see as important to work on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

I think that poster considers my very legitimate criticisms of the DC council’s positions on criminal justice to be framed by things like “Fox News talking points”. As though I’m sort of Trump bot, too biased to post my thoughts. I’m not. I hated trump. I hate having Congress meddle in our affairs generally.

Except I can and have pointed to very real negative outcomes from the Youth Rehabilitation Act, the Second Look act, violence interruptors, and other bills and policies that don’t really decrease violent crime. That poster can’t even frame in a few sentence their beliefs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/second-chance-law-for-young-criminals-puts-violent-offenders-back-on-dc-streets/2016/12/02/fcb56c74-8bc1-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html

This you?

the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime

There a similar history of, yes Fox News and their types, asking why nobody cares about black on black crime when, in fact, many people do and are working hard on difficult issues. It just shows that the taking heads don't actually know what's going on.

When you assume that progressives don't care about violent crime you sound just like them.

I assume they care. I know they care.

However, their approach is objectively tantamount to leniency. People will get away with what they can. It’s human nature. All the early release from prison, sentence reduction, pushing all the alternatives to incarceration, not protecting teens is coming from the progressive side. It exacerbates crime. On the national stage, reasonable people of ordinary prudence can see that those police’s aren’t helping. Chicago just said it loud and clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

I think that poster considers my very legitimate criticisms of the DC council’s positions on criminal justice to be framed by things like “Fox News talking points”. As though I’m sort of Trump bot, too biased to post my thoughts. I’m not. I hated trump. I hate having Congress meddle in our affairs generally.

Except I can and have pointed to very real negative outcomes from the Youth Rehabilitation Act, the Second Look act, violence interruptors, and other bills and policies that don’t really decrease violent crime. That poster can’t even frame in a few sentence their beliefs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/second-chance-law-for-young-criminals-puts-violent-offenders-back-on-dc-streets/2016/12/02/fcb56c74-8bc1-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html

This you?

the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime

There a similar history of, yes Fox News and their types, asking why nobody cares about black on black crime when, in fact, many people do and are working hard on difficult issues. It just shows that the taking heads don't actually know what's going on.

When you assume that progressives don't care about violent crime you sound just like them.

I assume they care. I know they care.

However, their approach is objectively tantamount to leniency. People will get away with what they can. It’s human nature. All the early release from prison, sentence reduction, pushing all the alternatives to incarceration, not protecting teens is coming from the progressive side. It exacerbates crime. On the national stage, reasonable people of ordinary prudence can see that those police’s aren’t helping. Chicago just said it loud and clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

I think that poster considers my very legitimate criticisms of the DC council’s positions on criminal justice to be framed by things like “Fox News talking points”. As though I’m sort of Trump bot, too biased to post my thoughts. I’m not. I hated trump. I hate having Congress meddle in our affairs generally.

Except I can and have pointed to very real negative outcomes from the Youth Rehabilitation Act, the Second Look act, violence interruptors, and other bills and policies that don’t really decrease violent crime. That poster can’t even frame in a few sentence their beliefs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/second-chance-law-for-young-criminals-puts-violent-offenders-back-on-dc-streets/2016/12/02/fcb56c74-8bc1-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html

This you?

the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime

There a similar history of, yes Fox News and their types, asking why nobody cares about black on black crime when, in fact, many people do and are working hard on difficult issues. It just shows that the taking heads don't actually know what's going on.

When you assume that progressives don't care about violent crime you sound just like them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

I agree with your platitudes, but what happens now, in reality, when the rubber meets the road, and if I am punched in the face and get my iPhone stolen and then the repeat offender teen who did it is somehow arrested, and gets no punishment, is let off, and the assault isn’t even placed on their record, which is generally how it works now. Where is my hope for the future and my wish to continue living in dc and paying taxes here to help support its growth?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

I think that poster considers my very legitimate criticisms of the DC council’s positions on criminal justice to be framed by things like “Fox News talking points”. As though I’m sort of Trump bot, too biased to post my thoughts. I’m not. I hated trump. I hate having Congress meddle in our affairs generally.

Except I can and have pointed to very real negative outcomes from the Youth Rehabilitation Act, the Second Look act, violence interruptors, and other bills and policies that don’t really decrease violent crime. That poster can’t even frame in a few sentence their beliefs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/second-chance-law-for-young-criminals-puts-violent-offenders-back-on-dc-streets/2016/12/02/fcb56c74-8bc1-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

I think that poster considers my very legitimate criticisms of the DC council’s positions on criminal justice to be framed by things like “Fox News talking points”. As though I’m sort of Trump bot, too biased to post my thoughts. I’m not. I hated trump. I hate having Congress meddle in our affairs generally.

Except I can and have pointed to very real negative outcomes from the Youth Rehabilitation Act, the Second Look act, violence interruptors, and other bills and policies that don’t really decrease violent crime. That poster can’t even frame in a few sentence their beliefs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/second-chance-law-for-young-criminals-puts-violent-offenders-back-on-dc-streets/2016/12/02/fcb56c74-8bc1-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html

the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?

Economic improvement and hope for the future is a far more effective means to reduce crime than just punishment. Before the haters jump on it, I'm not saying no punishment ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the response to OP has been to assume they want a super "tough on crime" approach that would wind up putting lots of people in jail with zero tolerance.

At least for me, that's not the case.

I am even open to a lot of the ideas to reform the criminal justice system.

I simply don't understand the current council's position, which is to ignore rising crime that is seriously impacting quality of life for constituents. I'm not saying let's adopt some draconian law and order regime and start putting people in prison for graffiti and truancy. I'm just saying: why would we lower the current sentences for violent crimes like carjacking (which is not just property theft -- I feel very differently about having my car stolen than I do about being carjacked, especially as someone who drives around with a child in the backseat really regularly)?

I'm disappointed that any criticism of the way the council is currently handling crime, which is a Top Two issue for me as a DC resident (next to education) is viewed as being racist or assumes I just love locking people up. I don't. But I also don't love the creeping feeling I have in my neighborhood (which, yes, is in Charles Allen's ward) that I am not safe, my kids aren't safe, my neighbors and their kids aren't safe, my kid's teachers aren't safe, the person I hire to babysit isn't safe, and so on and so forth.

The current situation with crime merits a response. But instead we're getting this crime bill which has a bunch of good stuff (we really, really need to update the current code) but also has some stuff in it that I find inexplicable.

See above. If you don't like people making baseless accusations against you then start by cutting out your baseless accusations against them. After all the hyperbole and talking points are gone then people like you and I can have reasonable conversations.

Where are my "baseless accusations"? Please note that I'm not the OP (though agree with some of what OP has said) and I think multiple people have posted in support of OP.

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am afraid that you are the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. The Members of the Council were popularly elected. Biden is not acting as the voice of the people, but as an unrepresentative autocrat overturning the will of the people. If Charles Allen is so unpopular, why didn't anyone even bother to run against him? To hear people like you tell it, that should have been the easiest seat to flip in the District.

There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the the crime situation in DC. But, thinking that it hinges on a law that doesn't even take effect until two years from now is absurd. The current situation is occurring under the vary laws you folks are so eager to protect.

As a lifelong resident who has witnessed first hand so many episodes of crime in my neighborhood (and packages and bikes stolen) in over it. I’m over the second look act, I’m over the youth rehab act, I’m over Charles Allen laying blame at feet of city services for “not cleaning up the leaves in time” so kids wouldn’t light them on fire.I’m tired of violent teens knowing they will simply face no consequences for stealing cars. I’m tired of speeders never losing their licenses now because tickets are “oppression”. You make your progressives bonafides very clear in many posts. I actually agree with many of them, especially your views on gender and transgender rights etc. However, it’s clear the progressive justice reform, however hip it is, is tantamount to leniency with regard to violent crime. Violence interruptors that cost millions, but for which studies show no efficacy, or this push for restorative justice for someone physically abused is leading to a culture that encourages more violence.

I get that we are in this era of re-examining criminal justice, and there have been horrendous tales of police violence, but truly the council would have basically allowed for no criminal penalties with its push for jury trials for misdeamonrs. You think our overburdened court system can see all these cases? Even with increased staff? No, basically none of these crimes would be anything other than dismissed or not prosecuted.

We have a growing violence problem. We need to be tough on crime. I’m sorry if the arrest stats are bad. Just arrest and prosecute criminals. We won’t. We will have a council that will double down. And we will have progressive DA’s and a system that just continues to look the other way, not prosecute, but keeps yapping endlessly that we need to “study then root causes of crime” in perpetuity.

Are you aware of the downsides of "tough on crime" approaches? Are you ok with that?

Having seen both in action, in more inclined to the time tested “get the criminals off the streets” approach’. I don’t really want to have a two hour social justice convo about it. I already know where you stand based on your post. For example, you’re cool with things like raising the minimum for felony theft to $1,000, whereas I am not, because it causes a lot of theft to occur and places like CVS closing in my neighborhood she folks walk out the door with their arms full and no one bats an eye because there is no point. And then you argue “but the big corporations have insurance!!!” And yeah I’ll pass on that sort of discussion thanks.

How cute of you to make assumptions. I'll assume you're ok with having an exorbitant percentage of our citizens in jail and you enjoy that it'll be applied more harshly to black people.

Or we could not make assumptions. Your call.

See, like of course, that was completely your predictable response: “but you just want everyone in jail you racist!!!!”

and that’s why I have no desire to talk to people who throw out baseless accusations. Just lock up whoever commits crime. It’s not racist. It’s common sense.

*makes baseless accusations*
*gets upset when people make baseless accusations about them*

Lol

Your position on violent crime was transparently clear from the tone of your first post. I know your make.

“Too many people in jail, im super progressive, instead of a strict approach to punishment as a deterrence let’s lessen penalties while studying the roots causes of poverty in perpetuity, all while whining there isn’t enough money being poured into wrap around social services. It’s not people’s fault when they commit crime because of their underlying circumstances.”

Am I on the right track? Yes, see we just saved ourselves like 10’posts. Basically, you’re okay with the soft bigotry of low expectations and are okay with infantalizing people. Whereas I am a realist and am from the city.

Nope, not even close, but I don't think you're even listening.

That’s great. Care to explain your ethos on criminal justice?

Only to people who are actually listening. I've had great conversations with people that hold fairly different views. There actually a lot in common that I think could be actionable with a large majority.

But then there's people like you who enjoy getting on a soapbox to criticize. I've tried talking to people who say things like you and it's pointless. So, no thanks.

We’re listening. In a nutshell, beyond “we lock too many people up” what are your positions?