Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10 years ago seemed much more safe.

Let me guess: you're in your 20's?

Or to put it in terms his generation understands: tell me you're in your 20's without telling me you're in your 20's.

I'm a different poster. I'm 45, and moved to DC in 2002. yes, it feels decidedly LESS safe today than it did in 2012 when my youngest was born. Why is it hard to comprehend that? Some of us live in areas that have always had a crime problem, but we've seen it get worse with our very eyes -- carjackings outside our front door, mom and child shot by ATV rider, the little girl who was killed outside Nats Park during a game, etc. nyc also feels less safe than when I graduated from college there in the late 90s.

DC wasn't "tough on crime" in 2012 or in 2002.

It was tougher. It was also tougher after the Clinton’s bill in the 90’s. I’m so tired of all the obstinate fks around here who seem to relish accommodating crime. It doesn’t make you virtuous or an ally.

The problem with "tough on crime" policies is that they don't really reduce crime. If they worked it would be hard to argue against them.

You mean like how crime rates declined consistently from the late-90’s until about 2018?

The reduction in crime started in the early 90s. Exactly 20 years after the legalization of abortion (Roe vs. Wade) and outlawing of lead in paint and gasoline.

Economists have pinpointed that access to abortion and the outlawing of lead were the biggest factors in the reduction of crime from 1993 to around 2015. Why? Because it reduced unwanted children and unwanted children are a lot more likely to become criminals. Similarly, lead exposure is hugely detrimental to brain development and impulse control.

Crime has since risen since 2015. Uf we could study it accurately, I would venture to guess that the current rise in crime is most associated with the loosening of firearms laws and restrictions. Gun deaths and gun crimes have risen enormously.

“Economists” LOL. None of these metrics are directly related to micro or macro econ. If you would have said sociologists, it would be more credible as social science research.

Dude. You know you are a douche, right? Also probably less educated than most on this thread. Not sure why you are peacocking, but it isn’t a good look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

All I can discern from your post is equity platitudes and euphemisms for being soft on crime.

That’s great it’s a diverse group that’s working on it. I mean it that.

But at the same time all the “modernization” will do is result in either abolishing what’s considered a crime altogether to help the statistics, things like quality of life crimes, or the modernization will allow shorter periods of incarceration which lets violent criminals back on the streets sooner, or really it will just be a bunch of novel things implemented with the input of sociologists and folks who take a “holistic look at crime with more of a focus on eradicating poverty and ensuring criminals get the Rehabiliation they need to function” and blah blah…

I live in this town. I see what the council is doing. Whether it’s 9m for violence interruptors in the face of violent crime increase. All the studies show they have no efficacy. Or if it’s Charles Allen and his raising the age for the youth rehab act to 26 to shield criminals records. Or allowing people with thousands of dollars to speeding tickets to keep their licenses because tickets “are oppression” or let fare evasion through or not trying to even stop the atv riders or just simply an antonistic approach to the police budget or basically how the court system works and how teens get a slap on the wrist and they know it…I’m pretty liberal, but on crime? Get the fk out of here. I was here in the 90s. I have seen people stabbed. Why do you want to coddle these people with your weak on crime nonsense? If anyone, anyone commits a violent act they should be in jail.

I guess what I mean is the progressives think their orthodoxy will somehow make public safety better, but thousands of years of evolution have shown us that really people will get away with what they think they can get away with. All your empathy and kindness for violent criminals does not improve the situation.

Also, ask yourself. Does dc have a history of implementing good policy? How is WMATA run? How efficient is DCRA? They had people there selling meth. What do they do well? How is progressive criminal justice reform doing in other jurisdictions? How does San Francisco look to you now? They recalled their liberal da. Why? Was it because progressive criminal justice reform actually makes the public less safe?

CA can recall prosecutors, in DC we can't even get stats from the federal USAO office, not now, not for as long as I have lived here. An ANC from the Hill has tried valiently but has been redistricted out for her troubles.

Yeah, it was Denise Krepp. Sadly she caught a bunch of heat for it on the local dc hill east Facebook group. As if trying to get stats is not allowed. There is is this really annoying vocal element of folks who decry tough on crime policy. As if anything that could lead to incarceration is bad. Or even calling the police is discouraged. It’s this kind of self flagellating virtue signaling where you “prove you’re down and a cool city dweller” by tolerating a certain amount of crime. It’s so fking stupid. Why buy a stupid $950,000+ row house if you don’t want the area to improve? It’s okay to call the cops if kids are lighting leaves on fire or throwing eggs and stuff at your house. I’m so tired of “altruistic to a fault” neighbors. It’s like that poor guy who was beaten up for telling kids to stop playing with his basketball hoop at 9pm because his kids needed to sleep. He was like “don’t blame the kids!”. I don’t care. I want the city to be better. I honestly want to support tax payers and people who don’t car jack or rob.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

All I can discern from your post is equity platitudes and euphemisms for being soft on crime.

That’s great it’s a diverse group that’s working on it. I mean it that.

But at the same time all the “modernization” will do is result in either abolishing what’s considered a crime altogether to help the statistics, things like quality of life crimes, or the modernization will allow shorter periods of incarceration which lets violent criminals back on the streets sooner, or really it will just be a bunch of novel things implemented with the input of sociologists and folks who take a “holistic look at crime with more of a focus on eradicating poverty and ensuring criminals get the Rehabiliation they need to function” and blah blah…

I live in this town. I see what the council is doing. Whether it’s 9m for violence interruptors in the face of violent crime increase. All the studies show they have no efficacy. Or if it’s Charles Allen and his raising the age for the youth rehab act to 26 to shield criminals records. Or allowing people with thousands of dollars to speeding tickets to keep their licenses because tickets “are oppression” or let fare evasion through or not trying to even stop the atv riders or just simply an antonistic approach to the police budget or basically how the court system works and how teens get a slap on the wrist and they know it…I’m pretty liberal, but on crime? Get the fk out of here. I was here in the 90s. I have seen people stabbed. Why do you want to coddle these people with your weak on crime nonsense? If anyone, anyone commits a violent act they should be in jail.

I guess what I mean is the progressives think their orthodoxy will somehow make public safety better, but thousands of years of evolution have shown us that really people will get away with what they think they can get away with. All your empathy and kindness for violent criminals does not improve the situation.

Also, ask yourself. Does dc have a history of implementing good policy? How is WMATA run? How efficient is DCRA? They had people there selling meth. What do they do well? How is progressive criminal justice reform doing in other jurisdictions? How does San Francisco look to you now? They recalled their liberal da. Why? Was it because progressive criminal justice reform actually makes the public less safe?

CA can recall prosecutors, in DC we can't even get stats from the federal USAO office, not now, not for as long as I have lived here. An ANC from the Hill has tried valiently but has been redistricted out for her troubles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

All I can discern from your post is equity platitudes and euphemisms for being soft on crime.

That’s great it’s a diverse group that’s working on it. I mean it that.

But at the same time all the “modernization” will do is result in either abolishing what’s considered a crime altogether to help the statistics, things like quality of life crimes, or the modernization will allow shorter periods of incarceration which lets violent criminals back on the streets sooner, or really it will just be a bunch of novel things implemented with the input of sociologists and folks who take a “holistic look at crime with more of a focus on eradicating poverty and ensuring criminals get the Rehabiliation they need to function” and blah blah…

I live in this town. I see what the council is doing. Whether it’s 9m for violence interruptors in the face of violent crime increase. All the studies show they have no efficacy. Or if it’s Charles Allen and his raising the age for the youth rehab act to 26 to shield criminals records. Or allowing people with thousands of dollars to speeding tickets to keep their licenses because tickets “are oppression” or let fare evasion through or not trying to even stop the atv riders or just simply an antonistic approach to the police budget or basically how the court system works and how teens get a slap on the wrist and they know it…I’m pretty liberal, but on crime? Get the fk out of here. I was here in the 90s. I have seen people stabbed. Why do you want to coddle these people with your weak on crime nonsense? If anyone, anyone commits a violent act they should be in jail.

I guess what I mean is the progressives think their orthodoxy will somehow make public safety better, but thousands of years of evolution have shown us that really people will get away with what they think they can get away with. All your empathy and kindness for violent criminals does not improve the situation.

Also, ask yourself. Does dc have a history of implementing good policy? How is WMATA run? How efficient is DCRA? They had people there selling meth. What do they do well? How is progressive criminal justice reform doing in other jurisdictions? How does San Francisco look to you now? They recalled their liberal da. Why? Was it because progressive criminal justice reform actually makes the public less safe?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

It’s not enough to cite the need for a comprehensive update to the criminal code for the first time since 1901; the overhaul has to be done in the right way. Among other things, the bill as introduced redefines some criminal offenses, removes mandatory minimum sentences for some established crimes, and changes judicial sentencing authority. That combination could result in fewer criminals being held accountable.

Equally disturbing, the bill would revise the offense for violating civil protection orders, which have kept alive more than a few victims of domestic violence; would adjust the penalty for failure to appear in court; and would revise the terms of supervised release. In other words, I think the legislation — unless it’s substantially altered from the original package — will only exacerbate concerns about the revolving doors at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the DC Superior Court.

Anonymous wrote:Bring back vice and mandatory minimums.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

All I can discern from your post is equity platitudes and euphemisms for being soft on crime.

That’s great it’s a diverse group that’s working on it. I mean it that.

But at the same time all the “modernization” will do is result in either abolishing what’s considered a crime altogether to help the statistics, things like quality of life crimes, or the modernization will allow shorter periods of incarceration which lets violent criminals back on the streets sooner, or really it will just be a bunch of novel things implemented with the input of sociologists and folks who take a “holistic look at crime with more of a focus on eradicating poverty and ensuring criminals get the Rehabiliation they need to function” and blah blah…

I live in this town. I see what the council is doing. Whether it’s 9m for violence interruptors in the face of violent crime increase. All the studies show they have no efficacy. Or if it’s Charles Allen and his raising the age for the youth rehab act to 26 to shield criminals records. Or allowing people with thousands of dollars to speeding tickets to keep their licenses because tickets “are oppression” or let fare evasion through or not trying to even stop the atv riders or just simply an antonistic approach to the police budget or basically how the court system works and how teens get a slap on the wrist and they know it…I’m pretty liberal, but on crime? Get the fk out of here. I was here in the 90s. I have seen people stabbed. Why do you want to coddle these people with your weak on crime nonsense? If anyone, anyone commits a violent act they should be in jail.

I guess what I mean is the progressives think their orthodoxy will somehow make public safety better, but thousands of years of evolution have shown us that really people will get away with what they think they can get away with. All your empathy and kindness for violent criminals does not improve the situation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

All I can discern from your post is equity platitudes and euphemisms for being soft on crime.

That’s great it’s a diverse group that’s working on it. I mean it that.

But at the same time all the “modernization” will do is result in either abolishing what’s considered a crime altogether to help the statistics, things like quality of life crimes, or the modernization will allow shorter periods of incarceration which lets violent criminals back on the streets sooner, or really it will just be a bunch of novel things implemented with the input of sociologists and folks who take a “holistic look at crime with more of a focus on eradicating poverty and ensuring criminals get the Rehabiliation they need to function” and blah blah…

I live in this town. I see what the council is doing. Whether it’s 9m for violence interruptors in the face of violent crime increase. All the studies show they have no efficacy. Or if it’s Charles Allen and his raising the age for the youth rehab act to 26 to shield criminals records. Or allowing people with thousands of dollars to speeding tickets to keep their licenses because tickets “are oppression” or let fare evasion through or not trying to even stop the atv riders or just simply an antonistic approach to the police budget or basically how the court system works and how teens get a slap on the wrist and they know it…I’m pretty liberal, but on crime? Get the fk out of here. I was here in the 90s. I have seen people stabbed. Why do you want to coddle these people with your weak on crime nonsense? If anyone, anyone commits a violent act they should be in jail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

The criminal code reform is not about making it more lenient. It is about modernizing it. The DC criminal code has not undergone a comprehensive revision in about a century, which is way out of step with what other jurisdictions have done. The recommendations that formed the foundation for the current bill were formed over the course of 4 years by a diverse group of participants. They are not winging it to be soft on crime. If you are interested in learning more, I'd suggest you check out: https://ccrc.dc.gov/page/frequently-asked-questions-8

Anonymous wrote:It’s comical that with rising crime the city is going to reform the criminal justice code so it’s more lenient.

Anonymous wrote:They should send raids to the low income housing and search for drugs and guns, that would solve 90% of the problem as the criminals would be in prison and fear doing things like crime

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10 years ago seemed much more safe.

Let me guess: you're in your 20's?

Or to put it in terms his generation understands: tell me you're in your 20's without telling me you're in your 20's.

I'm a different poster. I'm 45, and moved to DC in 2002. yes, it feels decidedly LESS safe today than it did in 2012 when my youngest was born. Why is it hard to comprehend that? Some of us live in areas that have always had a crime problem, but we've seen it get worse with our very eyes -- carjackings outside our front door, mom and child shot by ATV rider, the little girl who was killed outside Nats Park during a game, etc. nyc also feels less safe than when I graduated from college there in the late 90s.

DC wasn't "tough on crime" in 2012 or in 2002.

It was tougher. It was also tougher after the Clinton’s bill in the 90’s. I’m so tired of all the obstinate fks around here who seem to relish accommodating crime. It doesn’t make you virtuous or an ally.

The problem with "tough on crime" policies is that they don't really reduce crime. If they worked it would be hard to argue against them.

You mean like how crime rates declined consistently from the late-90’s until about 2018?

The reduction in crime started in the early 90s. Exactly 20 years after the legalization of abortion (Roe vs. Wade) and outlawing of lead in paint and gasoline.

Economists have pinpointed that access to abortion and the outlawing of lead were the biggest factors in the reduction of crime from 1993 to around 2015. Why? Because it reduced unwanted children and unwanted children are a lot more likely to become criminals. Similarly, lead exposure is hugely detrimental to brain development and impulse control.

Crime has since risen since 2015. Uf we could study it accurately, I would venture to guess that the current rise in crime is most associated with the loosening of firearms laws and restrictions. Gun deaths and gun crimes have risen enormously.

“Economists” LOL. None of these metrics are directly related to micro or macro econ. If you would have said sociologists, it would be more credible as social science research.