Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

This is just empirically untrue. Do you really believe this?

NP. How on earth could you believe this??? You think their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior??? If nothing else have you never heard of white collar crime??

The goalposts were shifted. My claim was that progressives view poor people as oppressed. A progressive confirmed this, so we don't need to debate that. My next claim was that, as critical theorists, progressives view the poor as victims whose illegal actions should be viewed as justice rather than crimes. I made no claims about the reasons poor people commit more crime but clearly they do. You would have to be a science and data-denier to say otherwise. Since you know that's a losing argument you've now shifted to "their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior" yet no one made that claim.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the rationale behind a person in their teens and early 20s walking around with thousands of dollars of branded clothing? Especially after at least one university (GWU) told them they were at risk and to stop wearing them. It can’t be status; it’s not their money.

The rationale is that GWU students and every other decent person have the right to have and enjoy the possessions they or their benefactors can afford, and that what needs to change is the behavior of criminals not others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These poor Jean Valjeans are just trying to clothe their families.

Have pity for them. They need the coats more than you do. These poor people don’t have access to any help.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That's how insane leftists are.

NP. While I find PP's tone a little odd considering the fact that there was a gun(!!!) involved, I do think that if this person truly did this out of a need for a coat, they deserve pity. Hopefully they can get a warm blanket and a hot meal in jail, and hopefully people at risk of freezing can get some kind of help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

This is just empirically untrue. Do you really believe this?

NP. How on earth could you believe this??? You think their brains are predisposed to criminal behavior??? If nothing else have you never heard of white collar crime??

Anonymous wrote:

And upper/middle class people steal all the time, just more sneakily, and white collar, and through legal loopholes. Your SEC does not determine how much more prone to criminal activity you are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the rationale behind a person in their teens and early 20s walking around with thousands of dollars of branded clothing? Especially after at least one university (GWU) told them they were at risk and to stop wearing them. It can’t be status; it’s not their money.

The rationale is that GWU students and every other decent person have the right to have and enjoy the possessions they or their benefactors can afford, and that what needs to change is the behavior of criminals not others.

Anonymous wrote:
just that humans often do messed up things because they are in messed up situations and I feel bad for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

You've clearly never been poor. I have and poor people are far more prone to criminal activity than middle and upper class folks. Any crime map or crime statistics will tell you this. As a progressive, you are living in the land of make-believe where "data is white supremacy" so you're not allowed to use it. So you are incapable of solving this issue.

Anonymous wrote:What is the rationale behind a person in their teens and early 20s walking around with thousands of dollars of branded clothing? Especially after at least one university (GWU) told them they were at risk and to stop wearing them. It can’t be status; it’s not their money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These poor Jean Valjeans are just trying to clothe their families.

Have pity for them. They need the coats more than you do. These poor people don’t have access to any help.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That's how insane leftists are.

NP. While I find PP's tone a little odd considering the fact that there was a gun(!!!) involved, I do think that if this person truly did this out of a need for a coat, they deserve pity. Hopefully they can get a warm blanket and a hot meal in jail, and hopefully people at risk of freezing can get some kind of help.

Spoken like someone who has never been a victim of violent crime.

Oh I have, actually. Not as bad as this but I have been attacked on the street. Les Miserables and "turn the other cheek" references are cliche but they are common for a reason. Some people really do tend toward compassion and believe that is the best course of action. This is not to say that there should be no consequences, just that humans often do messed up things because they are in messed up situations and I feel bad for them.

Oh, so you're just a weak victim. Got it. Did you apologize for your privilege while you were being attacked?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These poor Jean Valjeans are just trying to clothe their families.

Have pity for them. They need the coats more than you do. These poor people don’t have access to any help.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That's how insane leftists are.

NP. While I find PP's tone a little odd considering the fact that there was a gun(!!!) involved, I do think that if this person truly did this out of a need for a coat, they deserve pity. Hopefully they can get a warm blanket and a hot meal in jail, and hopefully people at risk of freezing can get some kind of help.

Spoken like someone who has never been a victim of violent crime.

Oh I have, actually. Not as bad as this but I have been attacked on the street. Les Miserables and "turn the other cheek" references are cliche but they are common for a reason. Some people really do tend toward compassion and believe that is the best course of action. This is not to say that there should be no consequences, just that humans often do messed up things because they are in messed up situations and I feel bad for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These poor Jean Valjeans are just trying to clothe their families.

Have pity for them. They need the coats more than you do. These poor people don’t have access to any help.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That's how insane leftists are.

NP. While I find PP's tone a little odd considering the fact that there was a gun(!!!) involved, I do think that if this person truly did this out of a need for a coat, they deserve pity. Hopefully they can get a warm blanket and a hot meal in jail, and hopefully people at risk of freezing can get some kind of help.

Spoken like someone who has never been a victim of violent crime.

Anonymous wrote:What is the rationale behind a person in their teens and early 20s walking around with thousands of dollars of branded clothing? Especially after at least one university (GWU) told them they were at risk and to stop wearing them. It can’t be status; it’s not their money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did DC get cleaned up in the past , what is the current barrier to getting crime down

Most progressives are critical theorists so they view the poor as oppressed. To them, street crime is justice. That's why this won't be solved as long as leftists are in charge. We need good moderate liberals and conservatives to come in and implement solutions that work in the real world, not just the world of make-believe that progressives live in.

You are wrong. I am a progressive that believes that the poor are clearly oppressed in our society. The flaw in your nasty assumption is that I don’t think these kids are criminals because they are poor. Poor people are not “more criminal” in nature than wealthy people. You are not a serious person and would rather tilt at windmills than discuss these issues reasonably.

You've clearly never been poor. I have and poor people are far more prone to criminal activity than middle and upper class folks. Any crime map or crime statistics will tell you this. As a progressive, you are living in the land of make-believe where "data is white supremacy" so you're not allowed to use it. So you are incapable of solving this issue.