Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

Yes, it's 15 years, not 10. And it merely allows for individuals to petition for release. A judge ultimately makes the determination based on 11 statutory criteria. Some end up released, some do not.

And, most importantly, after five years, only seven people (or 5.6%) have been re-arrested and are awaiting a court proceeding.

you understand only a tiny minority of dc violent crimes actually have an arrest let alone a conviction right?

I'd love to see some data. The homicide closure rate is around 2/3rds. I have not seen the data on other violent crime. Since you know it is a tiny minority, I'd love to see it.

But, more importantly, most of these folks released are under intense supervision - some for life. So, unlike some random DC resident, their actions are pretty tightly monitored.

Are you insinuating that we can safely assume that far more people released via this second look provision have committed crimes that are not just not detected?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

Yes, it's 15 years, not 10. And it merely allows for individuals to petition for release. A judge ultimately makes the determination based on 11 statutory criteria. Some end up released, some do not.

And, most importantly, after five years, only seven people (or 5.6%) have been re-arrested and are awaiting a court proceeding.

you understand only a tiny minority of dc violent crimes actually have an arrest let alone a conviction right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

Yes, it's 15 years, not 10. And it merely allows for individuals to petition for release. A judge ultimately makes the determination based on 11 statutory criteria. Some end up released, some do not.

And, most importantly, after five years, only seven people (or 5.6%) have been re-arrested and are awaiting a court proceeding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RIP DC property values.. say hello to the 90s all over again.

So.much.progress.

Funny, in the 90's we had the current criminal code.

And the reduction of crime occurred under the current code as well.

So maybe that has nothing to do with crime? What other variables are there, hmm. The economy? Opportunities? Less lead?

More incarceration. When in jail, people cannot commit further crimes in the community. It’s the only thing that works. Less incarceration equals more crime, and while there remains an argument for less incarceration, I wish advocates would stop gaslighting people about it and acknowledge the trade-off.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

So who is being released and under what circumstances?

Or are you trying the Willie Horton racial fear mongering route?

it’s actually 15 years but that’s a very short time for murder

It's actually just a few years shy of the average time served before release for murder (https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tssp18.pdf)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

So who is being released and under what circumstances?

Or are you trying the Willie Horton racial fear mongering route?

it’s actually 15 years but that’s a very short time for murder

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

So who is being released and under what circumstances?

Or are you trying the Willie Horton racial fear mongering route?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

they passed a law a few years ago that allows release after 10 years if they committed their crime if they were younger than 25. It was all over the news

Anonymous wrote:Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Oh my goodness, that sounds terrible. I'd love to learn more. Can you please share some examples or newspaper articles of even a shred of evidence that this is true and not something you made up?

Softness on crime is a civil rights violation of victims and future victims

Dc is releasing murderers after 10 years. Thry should be serving life

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RIP DC property values.. say hello to the 90s all over again.

So.much.progress.

Funny, in the 90's we had the current criminal code.

And the reduction of crime occurred under the current code as well.

So maybe that has nothing to do with crime? What other variables are there, hmm. The economy? Opportunities? Less lead?

More incarceration. When in jail, people cannot commit further crimes in the community. It’s the only thing that works. Less incarceration equals more crime, and while there remains an argument for less incarceration, I wish advocates would stop gaslighting people about it and acknowledge the trade-off.

It does seem like a fix although you have to admit it's short term, doesn't address the underlying issues, and doesn't solve anything big picture. Do you have any evidence that at the macro scale we can incarcerate out way into reduced crime?

What about when the person is eventually released? Will they have the ability to afford food/clothing/shelter or is their only real opportunity to survive to try crime again?

What is the impact on others? Does it mean kids raised without a parent? If that was their only parent what will it do to put them through the foster system? Will they be more likely to follow the same path?

Do you distinguish between violent crime where we need to protect people from being harmed vs nonviolent?

What's the cost to us as a society to pay for prisons (we have a lot more than the most of the world) versus alleviating poverty?

Anonymous wrote:It’s very simple, if you want to stop crime get everyone jobs and a house they can afford.

Agreed. Government subsidized housing and a job making license plates would be very effective at stopping crime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RIP DC property values.. say hello to the 90s all over again.

So.much.progress.

Funny, in the 90's we had the current criminal code.

And the reduction of crime occurred under the current code as well.

So maybe that has nothing to do with crime? What other variables are there, hmm. The economy? Opportunities? Less lead?

More incarceration. When in jail, people cannot commit further crimes in the community. It’s the only thing that works. Less incarceration equals more crime, and while there remains an argument for less incarceration, I wish advocates would stop gaslighting people about it and acknowledge the trade-off.

It’s very simple, if you want to stop crime get everyone jobs and a house they can afford.