I'm confused though...
Can anyone clarify before I pick up the phone? I am pro anti crime measures--is there anything I need to advocate for at this point? Are you saying there will be significant (crime friendly) changes introduced before the second vote? Does the Tuesday vote not put the bill in effect? I agree DC needs urgency on this.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/crime/2841628/dc-council-passes-crime-omnibus-passes-first-vote/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frumin questioned if DNA collection is too invasive? What the what?

Do you think he’s anticipating becoming justice-involved? DNA on dollar bills?

Nah. But DNA can be left on pickle ball rackets.

😂

OMG Hilarious!

So what is going on with the bill? It is the one shred of hope I am holding on to.

DO I need to start calling and emailing all the council members... again??

The bill has been significantly watered down. The first vote was yesterday. The second vote has been pushed to possibly March. I assume they will further weaken the bill in the interim. Medo mentioned working with "national groups" on the bill but when asked, he declined to name them.

I am outraged. People are dying. I am calling his office now. Thanks

This is family friendly

Anonymous wrote:Mendo had little control over the proceedings or the audience. Has he always been this bad? Completely ineffectual and not too fussed about it?

A lot of people are paying attention to their "work performance" for the first time and it's the not ready for prime time players...

Mendo does whatever he wants procedurally. This was for show so he doesn't care.

Their first action yesterday was to name a convicted murderer to the Sentencing Commission. They included a provision in the Secure DC bill REQUIRING that the Council nominee be someone previously incarcerated. For reals.

The Sentencing Commission is comprised of judges, attorneys and academics. They provide technical guidance to judges on sentencing guidelines. It's not a "lived experience" gig.

This Council does not only coddle criminals, they honor them. There were many attempts to weaken the pretrial holding provisions and the requirement that judges document reasons for release (likely to make them think twice) was dropped.

DC has not hit the bottom yet, nor are electeds responding to public sentiment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frumin questioned if DNA collection is too invasive? What the what?

Do you think he’s anticipating becoming justice-involved? DNA on dollar bills?

Nah. But DNA can be left on pickle ball rackets.

😂

OMG Hilarious!

So what is going on with the bill? It is the one shred of hope I am holding on to.

DO I need to start calling and emailing all the council members... again??

The bill has been significantly watered down. The first vote was yesterday. The second vote has been pushed to possibly March. I assume they will further weaken the bill in the interim. Medo mentioned working with "national groups" on the bill but when asked, he declined to name them.

Anonymous wrote:Mendo had little control over the proceedings or the audience. Has he always been this bad? Completely ineffectual and not too fussed about it?

A lot of people are paying attention to their "work performance" for the first time and it's the not ready for prime time players...

I don’t care anymore about DC; just counting the days until I can move back home and leave this sinking ship behind.

Anonymous wrote:Do we need the Council?

No. They are bad actors. Can we run them out of town?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frumin questioned if DNA collection is too invasive? What the what?

Do you think he’s anticipating becoming justice-involved? DNA on dollar bills?

Nah. But DNA can be left on pickle ball rackets.

😂

OMG Hilarious!

So what is going on with the bill? It is the one shred of hope I am holding on to.

DO I need to start calling and emailing all the council members... again??

Do we need the Council?

Mendo had little control over the proceedings or the audience. Has he always been this bad? Completely ineffectual and not too fussed about it?

A lot of people are paying attention to their "work performance" for the first time and it's the not ready for prime time players...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol

@dna, it wasn't even an original idea, other councilmembers already raised it, as did activists.

frumin is extremely unimpressive.

jlg is shockingly inarticulate for a lawyer and former prosecutor.

She really needs to go. It also seemed that during the vote she really didn't know how she was going to vote (missed the role call, then second round seemed to want to ask for more time). She's buying for time until the second reading so her opponents in the race can't hammer her yet on the no vote she so desperately wants to give.

This. For those that don't know, she is a former prosecutor. That may make the performance of AG and USAO more clear. Rather than being staffed with those with the goal of public safety, both offices have a lot of JLG types.

I think Lisa Gore has a shot.

Anonymous wrote:This council disgusts me. If I could move tomorrow, I would.

That and the additional risks posed by the 911 call center not picking up, sending help to wrong quadrant, etc. are pretty sobering. Bowser is better than the Council on crime but she has blood on her hands too. It's clear why the Council needs outside groups to come in and do their jobs for them, very unimpressive people. Pinto is better, as is Henderson, Cheh was. The rest are something.

Anonymous wrote:lol

@dna, it wasn't even an original idea, other councilmembers already raised it, as did activists.

frumin is extremely unimpressive.

jlg is shockingly inarticulate for a lawyer and former prosecutor.

She really needs to go. It also seemed that during the vote she really didn't know how she was going to vote (missed the role call, then second round seemed to want to ask for more time). She's buying for time until the second reading so her opponents in the race can't hammer her yet on the no vote she so desperately wants to give.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frumin questioned if DNA collection is too invasive? What the what?

Do you think he’s anticipating becoming justice-involved? DNA on dollar bills?

Nah. But DNA can be left on pickle ball rackets.

😂