Anonymous wrote:Where can we find reliable stats about DC Superior court? How many cases are tried, etc.? In the last 6 months my husband and I have both received jury duty notices. The night before, we each received notifications that we weren't needed and our service was complete. We're wondering if that means the courts are doing very little in terms of holding hearings and trials. My gut sense is that even if someone is arrested and charged for a crime in DC (and we know lots of crimes are basically being excused now) those alleged criminals aren't getting prosecuted. Is DC Superior court functioning at the same pace/level as years past?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There are few cities in America with more onerous regulations on its taxpayers that go out of there way to make sure criminals can avoid all regulations than DC. They know that the taxpayers are suckers.


This is the thing. It’s not even that D.C. is some bastion of Libertarianism that just wants to let everyone do whatever they want. It’s that they only want to enforce laws that tie into extremist activists ideology.

Hundreds of people killed this year? No big deal. 10 dogs killed? Look at how much attention the Council or the DC sub gave that. Rampant violent assaults and threats? You’re a fear mongerer. Parking in the bike line? Hey, now there’s a big issue.

The Council didn’t get upset about the child that was killed by a stray bullet driving home on mother’s day, or the dangerous criminal who was released against a judges wishes and murdered an innocent woman this year. Or the guy who tried to murder a pub owner in front of his son, and only got 8 months. But the resident who found himself in a confrontation with a group of car thieves outside his house at 4 am and ended up shooting one? That angered the Council, and got them to demand justice.

Nadeau’s bill to decriminalize street vendors who are hawking the stolen good from CVS passed the Council 12-0. Yet legitimate businesses have to spend years waiting for their permits to get approved.

There was a case recently where a guy had his car stolen and the thieves racked up tickets. D.C. said he waited too long to contest the tickets, so he had to pay $700. The car thieves were released without any conviction.

The city thinks it needs to make it extremely hard for law abiding citizens to purchase a gun. Yet at the same time, criminals with illegal guns are routinely let free. There was a case recently where police found an illegal gun on a guy, the judge threw out the charges for idiotic reasons (the police asked if he was armed before approaching, which the judge said police can’t do), and he murdered someone a few days later. Brooke Pinto tried to get the city to be tougher on illegal guns, but the rest of the Council was against it. They want to make things as difficult as can be for legal gun owners, and let illegal gun owners roam free.

The low prosecution rates? The D.C. Council actually took issue with that several years back, even Charles Allen said it was terrible. Oh, but they only cared about the low prosecution rates for hate crimes. They even made sure that the hearing about it specifically said it was only about hate crime prosecution rates. Assault, murder? Who cares.

Over and over again. It would be bad enough if D.C. was just a lawless wasteland. But what the Council seems to want is for the law to come down hard against anyone outside of the extremist activist culture, while doing everything it can to protect violent criminals.

This is an accurate summary. Another 30 year resident seriously considering permanent relocation. Where can I sign up to help campaign for the ballot initiative to allow independents to vote in the Democratic primary? That might be the only thing that saves us. Otherwise, we will increasingly see vigilante self-protection, since it IS possible to get a concealed carry permit in DC, albeit onerous. Once enough carjackers get shot by their would-be victims, then things might start to turn around. The people really responsible for the deaths of those juvenile carjackers? (a) the parents, for not teaching them better and (b) Brian Schwalb and the DCAG's office, for not confining the kids (at least the 2nd victim) when they had multiple prior carjacking offenses.

Anonymous wrote:Where can we find reliable stats about DC Superior court? How many cases are tried, etc.? In the last 6 months my husband and I have both received jury duty notices. The night before, we each received notifications that we weren't needed and our service was complete. We're wondering if that means the courts are doing very little in terms of holding hearings and trials. My gut sense is that even if someone is arrested and charged for a crime in DC (and we know lots of crimes are basically being excused now) those alleged criminals aren't getting prosecuted. Is DC Superior court functioning at the same pace/level as years past?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There are few cities in America with more onerous regulations on its taxpayers that go out of there way to make sure criminals can avoid all regulations than DC. They know that the taxpayers are suckers.


This is the thing. It’s not even that D.C. is some bastion of Libertarianism that just wants to let everyone do whatever they want. It’s that they only want to enforce laws that tie into extremist activists ideology.

Hundreds of people killed this year? No big deal. 10 dogs killed? Look at how much attention the Council or the DC sub gave that. Rampant violent assaults and threats? You’re a fear mongerer. Parking in the bike line? Hey, now there’s a big issue.

The Council didn’t get upset about the child that was killed by a stray bullet driving home on mother’s day, or the dangerous criminal who was released against a judges wishes and murdered an innocent woman this year. Or the guy who tried to murder a pub owner in front of his son, and only got 8 months. But the resident who found himself in a confrontation with a group of car thieves outside his house at 4 am and ended up shooting one? That angered the Council, and got them to demand justice.

Nadeau’s bill to decriminalize street vendors who are hawking the stolen good from CVS passed the Council 12-0. Yet legitimate businesses have to spend years waiting for their permits to get approved.

There was a case recently where a guy had his car stolen and the thieves racked up tickets. D.C. said he waited too long to contest the tickets, so he had to pay $700. The car thieves were released without any conviction.

The city thinks it needs to make it extremely hard for law abiding citizens to purchase a gun. Yet at the same time, criminals with illegal guns are routinely let free. There was a case recently where police found an illegal gun on a guy, the judge threw out the charges for idiotic reasons (the police asked if he was armed before approaching, which the judge said police can’t do), and he murdered someone a few days later. Brooke Pinto tried to get the city to be tougher on illegal guns, but the rest of the Council was against it. They want to make things as difficult as can be for legal gun owners, and let illegal gun owners roam free.

The low prosecution rates? The D.C. Council actually took issue with that several years back, even Charles Allen said it was terrible. Oh, but they only cared about the low prosecution rates for hate crimes. They even made sure that the hearing about it specifically said it was only about hate crime prosecution rates. Assault, murder? Who cares.

Over and over again. It would be bad enough if D.C. was just a lawless wasteland. But what the Council seems to want is for the law to come down hard against anyone outside of the extremist activist culture, while doing everything it can to protect violent criminals.

This is an accurate summary. Another 30 year resident seriously considering permanent relocation. Where can I sign up to help campaign for the ballot initiative to allow independents to vote in the Democratic primary? That might be the only thing that saves us. Otherwise, we will increasingly see vigilante self-protection, since it IS possible to get a concealed carry permit in DC, albeit onerous. Once enough carjackers get shot by their would-be victims, then things might start to turn around. The people really responsible for the deaths of those juvenile carjackers? (a) the parents, for not teaching them better and (b) Brian Schwalb and the DCAG's office, for not confining the kids (at least the 2nd victim) when they had multiple prior carjacking offenses.

Anonymous wrote:
There are few cities in America with more onerous regulations on its taxpayers that go out of there way to make sure criminals can avoid all regulations than DC. They know that the taxpayers are suckers.


This is the thing. It’s not even that D.C. is some bastion of Libertarianism that just wants to let everyone do whatever they want. It’s that they only want to enforce laws that tie into extremist activists ideology.

Hundreds of people killed this year? No big deal. 10 dogs killed? Look at how much attention the Council or the DC sub gave that. Rampant violent assaults and threats? You’re a fear mongerer. Parking in the bike line? Hey, now there’s a big issue.

The Council didn’t get upset about the child that was killed by a stray bullet driving home on mother’s day, or the dangerous criminal who was released against a judges wishes and murdered an innocent woman this year. Or the guy who tried to murder a pub owner in front of his son, and only got 8 months. But the resident who found himself in a confrontation with a group of car thieves outside his house at 4 am and ended up shooting one? That angered the Council, and got them to demand justice.

Nadeau’s bill to decriminalize street vendors who are hawking the stolen good from CVS passed the Council 12-0. Yet legitimate businesses have to spend years waiting for their permits to get approved.

There was a case recently where a guy had his car stolen and the thieves racked up tickets. D.C. said he waited too long to contest the tickets, so he had to pay $700. The car thieves were released without any conviction.

The city thinks it needs to make it extremely hard for law abiding citizens to purchase a gun. Yet at the same time, criminals with illegal guns are routinely let free. There was a case recently where police found an illegal gun on a guy, the judge threw out the charges for idiotic reasons (the police asked if he was armed before approaching, which the judge said police can’t do), and he murdered someone a few days later. Brooke Pinto tried to get the city to be tougher on illegal guns, but the rest of the Council was against it. They want to make things as difficult as can be for legal gun owners, and let illegal gun owners roam free.

The low prosecution rates? The D.C. Council actually took issue with that several years back, even Charles Allen said it was terrible. Oh, but they only cared about the low prosecution rates for hate crimes. They even made sure that the hearing about it specifically said it was only about hate crime prosecution rates. Assault, murder? Who cares.

Over and over again. It would be bad enough if D.C. was just a lawless wasteland. But what the Council seems to want is for the law to come down hard against anyone outside of the extremist activist culture, while doing everything it can to protect violent criminals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are few cities in America with more onerous regulations on its taxpayers that go out of there way to make sure criminals can avoid all regulations than DC. They know that the taxpayers are suckers.

This is the thing. It’s not even that D.C. is some bastion of Libertarianism that just wants to let everyone do whatever they want. It’s that they only want to enforce laws that tie into extremist activists ideology.

Hundreds of people killed this year? No big deal. 10 dogs killed? Look at how much attention the Council or the DC sub gave that. Rampant violent assaults and threats? You’re a fear mongerer. Parking in the bike line? Hey, now there’s a big issue.

The Council didn’t get upset about the child that was killed by a stray bullet driving home on mother’s day, or the dangerous criminal who was released against a judges wishes and murdered an innocent woman this year. Or the guy who tried to murder a pub owner in front of his son, and only got 8 months. But the resident who found himself in a confrontation with a group of car thieves outside his house at 4 am and ended up shooting one? That angered the Council, and got them to demand justice.

Nadeau’s bill to decriminalize street vendors who are hawking the stolen good from CVS passed the Council 12-0. Yet legitimate businesses have to spend years waiting for their permits to get approved.

There was a case recently where a guy had his car stolen and the thieves racked up tickets. D.C. said he waited too long to contest the tickets, so he had to pay $700. The car thieves were released without any conviction.

The city thinks it needs to make it extremely hard for law abiding citizens to purchase a gun. Yet at the same time, criminals with illegal guns are routinely let free. There was a case recently where police found an illegal gun on a guy, the judge threw out the charges for idiotic reasons (the police asked if he was armed before approaching, which the judge said police can’t do), and he murdered someone a few days later. Brooke Pinto tried to get the city to be tougher on illegal guns, but the rest of the Council was against it. They want to make things as difficult as can be for legal gun owners, and let illegal gun owners roam free.

The low prosecution rates? The D.C. Council actually took issue with that several years back, even Charles Allen said it was terrible. Oh, but they only cared about the low prosecution rates for hate crimes. They even made sure that the hearing about it specifically said it was only about hate crime prosecution rates. Assault, murder? Who cares.

Over and over again. It would be bad enough if D.C. was just a lawless wasteland. But what the Council seems to want is for the law to come down hard against anyone outside of the extremist activist culture, while doing everything it can to protect violent criminals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No ski masks for the purpose of committing crime. (Good luck enforcing this one.)
Suggests new law making it illegal to direct organized retail theft. (Wut? Orchestrating criminal activity wasn't illegal before?)
Limits on open air drug dealing and loitering. Police chief can declare and implement 120 hour-long drug free zone to disrupt drug use and sales. (Only 120 hours?)

GMAFB.com

https://wjla.com/news/local/dc-mayor-bowser-legislation-reduce-crime-rates-addressing-trends-now-act-homicide-shooting-carjacking-juveniles-public-safety-acting-chief-police-mpd-law-enforcement-metropolitan-high#

Truly just pandering to put the onus on Council. The wildest part is that she wants to roll back the prohibition on neck restraints (like the kind that killed George Floyd which led to Bowser having her biggest political moment of painting a plaza with Black Lives Matter), which have been prohibited since the 1980s in DC because they can result in serious harm. Her proposal begs the question: is MPD's inability to seriously harm people through neck restraints what is preventing them from doing their job or does she think the use of neck restraints will somehow cause would-be criminals to think twice?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser coasted on the trends that her predecessors started and her luck has run out. DC has not recovered from the pandemic in terms of the economic hit downtown took and the effect on youth. Combine this with the unique and awful federal control of most of the criminal justice system and you have a mess.

She has never had any ideas. This bill will do nothing to improve public safety.

This is the answer, right here.

Anonymous wrote:Bowser coasted on the trends that her predecessors started and her luck has run out. DC has not recovered from the pandemic in terms of the economic hit downtown took and the effect on youth. Combine this with the unique and awful federal control of most of the criminal justice system and you have a mess.

She has never had any ideas. This bill will do nothing to improve public safety.

Anonymous wrote:No ski masks for the purpose of committing crime. (Good luck enforcing this one.)
Suggests new law making it illegal to direct organized retail theft. (Wut? Orchestrating criminal activity wasn't illegal before?)
Limits on open air drug dealing and loitering. Police chief can declare and implement 120 hour-long drug free zone to disrupt drug use and sales. (Only 120 hours?)

GMAFB.com

https://wjla.com/news/local/dc-mayor-bowser-legislation-reduce-crime-rates-addressing-trends-now-act-homicide-shooting-carjacking-juveniles-public-safety-acting-chief-police-mpd-law-enforcement-metropolitan-high#

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are few cities in America with more onerous regulations on its taxpayers that go out of there way to make sure criminals can avoid all regulations than DC. They know that the taxpayers are suckers.

This is the thing. It’s not even that D.C. is some bastion of Libertarianism that just wants to let everyone do whatever they want. It’s that they only want to enforce laws that tie into extremist activists ideology.

Hundreds of people killed this year? No big deal. 10 dogs killed? Look at how much attention the Council or the DC sub gave that. Rampant violent assaults and threats? You’re a fear mongerer. Parking in the bike line? Hey, now there’s a big issue.

The Council didn’t get upset about the child that was killed by a stray bullet driving home on mother’s day, or the dangerous criminal who was released against a judges wishes and murdered an innocent woman this year. Or the guy who tried to murder a pub owner in front of his son, and only got 8 months. But the resident who found himself in a confrontation with a group of car thieves outside his house at 4 am and ended up shooting one? That angered the Council, and got them to demand justice.

Nadeau’s bill to decriminalize street vendors who are hawking the stolen good from CVS passed the Council 12-0. Yet legitimate businesses have to spend years waiting for their permits to get approved.

There was a case recently where a guy had his car stolen and the thieves racked up tickets. D.C. said he waited too long to contest the tickets, so he had to pay $700. The car thieves were released without any conviction.

The city thinks it needs to make it extremely hard for law abiding citizens to purchase a gun. Yet at the same time, criminals with illegal guns are routinely let free. There was a case recently where police found an illegal gun on a guy, the judge threw out the charges for idiotic reasons (the police asked if he was armed before approaching, which the judge said police can’t do), and he murdered someone a few days later. Brooke Pinto tried to get the city to be tougher on illegal guns, but the rest of the Council was against it. They want to make things as difficult as can be for legal gun owners, and let illegal gun owners roam free.

The low prosecution rates? The D.C. Council actually took issue with that several years back, even Charles Allen said it was terrible. Oh, but they only cared about the low prosecution rates for hate crimes. They even made sure that the hearing about it specifically said it was only about hate crime prosecution rates. Assault, murder? Who cares.

Over and over again. It would be bad enough if D.C. was just a lawless wasteland. But what the Council seems to want is for the law to come down hard against anyone outside of the extremist activist culture, while doing everything it can to protect violent criminals.