Anonymous wrote:The slaying of this young man in Trinidad the other day who was about to graduate high school and join the marines really getting to me. Sounded like a kid keeping his head down and just living his life. When will this break through to people that we can't pin all of our hopes on violence interrupters.
Slain D.C. student wanted to join the Marines after graduation

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/12/08/dc-police-fatal-shooting-student/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country is strange.

Half of the populace is willfully obtuse to the dangers of guns in the face of terrible rates of death. Just look at the murder statistics in Japan and European countries that have banned guns for the most simple explanation for why we need strict gun laws.

We also have issues just facing cold hard facts with who commits crime and why they should be locked up. I don’t want Charles Allen to tread the same ground that’s already been trodden by “examining the root causes of crime so as to develop a holistic approach to fighting it”. The causes are obvious: poverty, homes with one parent, or parents who aren’t around or who even care, etc. there are a million studies that show they root cause of crime.

And so, Charles Allen can kowtow to the self-flagellating criminal justice reform folks all he wants. He can waste money on all the “violence interruptors” and spend money on restorative justice, and Youth Rehabilitaton Act, and second chance act and all this other nonsense that is less effective than just tough on crime policing and arrest.

The facts are that some families get screwed because their father commit a violent crime or a teen gets locked up for murder. Or what have you. We need to enforce the law on violent crime. We could legalize other stuff like drugs, but we need to fight violent crime or it’s going to be 1990 all over again and families will leave and the tax base will dry up and it will suck again.

This lens is just incredible. And I'm not attacking you, PP, because I know the context of the conversation and where this is coming from.

But the families that truly, primarily, and innocently get screwed are the the families of the victims. Nevermind the actual victims.

Somehow, we've just decided to ignore them. It's like, the crime has occurred and we can't prevent that victimization, so we should focus on providing social support for the criminal and their families.

The entire premise is Orwellian.

Anonymous wrote:This country is strange.

Half of the populace is willfully obtuse to the dangers of guns in the face of terrible rates of death. Just look at the murder statistics in Japan and European countries that have banned guns for the most simple explanation for why we need strict gun laws.

We also have issues just facing cold hard facts with who commits crime and why they should be locked up. I don’t want Charles Allen to tread the same ground that’s already been trodden by “examining the root causes of crime so as to develop a holistic approach to fighting it”. The causes are obvious: poverty, homes with one parent, or parents who aren’t around or who even care, etc. there are a million studies that show they root cause of crime.

And so, Charles Allen can kowtow to the self-flagellating criminal justice reform folks all he wants. He can waste money on all the “violence interruptors” and spend money on restorative justice, and Youth Rehabilitaton Act, and second chance act and all this other nonsense that is less effective than just tough on crime policing and arrest.

The facts are that some families get screwed because their father commit a violent crime or a teen gets locked up for murder. Or what have you. We need to enforce the law on violent crime. We could legalize other stuff like drugs, but we need to fight violent crime or it’s going to be 1990 all over again and families will leave and the tax base will dry up and it will suck again.

Anonymous wrote:Ward 6 resident here. Charles Allen panders too much to people soft on crime. His solution? Violence interrupters. What are those? They’re basically ex-cons strategically hired and placed in communities to try and stop violence by talking to those most likely to commit violence before it happens. Do they work? No. Most studies show they don’t reduce crime and may exacerbate it.

Why is he doing it? Because I hate the word, but “woke” pressure to use a more holistic, caring approach to crime, so as not to uproot community members and disrupt families, is being implemented.

What else is he doing? He is a big proposed of the Youth Rehabilitation Act and second chance law. Those laws let violent criminals out of jail early. They reduce sentence lengths. Also, he’s done nothing to dissuade teens from robbing people. The city is very lenient on that and it’s basically catch and release.

I would love to vote for someone tougher. Honestly, even Denise Krepp if she ran. She tried to subpoena crime records from DOJ for years, but appears to have been stymied at every turn. I’m sick of politicians pandering to violent elements at the expense of tax paying citizens who contribute greatly to the tax base.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Charles Allen is the most effective council member I've had since I've lived in DC. He is taking a thoughtful approach to crime and addressing its multiple causes. Yes, he doesn't get on a soapbox and yell about it, like some local pols. I used to be impressed that Denise Krepp was seeking crime data from the city but now it just looks like more bluster. I know it might make us feel better to hear it, but bluster doesn't stop crime either.

Thoughtful, yes. Effective is dependent on your perspective. I have tried to engage his office several times about the danger posed by Florida Avenue and the slowness of fixing it despite repeated crashes and injuries, including deaths. He seems disinterested. I think it's because it's the edge of his ward and he views his constituency as the (mostly white) people who live in the heart of Capitol Hill. Not those of us north of H, not people in Hill East, nor people in far SE. He is good at serving the needs of a specific group of people who think of themselves as Ward 6. But it's a huge ward (which is why it's being redistricted) with a lot of diverse concerns. He has chosen to focus on a certain demographic and serve them well, as well as appeal to their egos. But to say he's more effective than other politicians is to ignore his many, many blind spots.

Anonymous wrote:This country is strange.

Half of the populace is willfully obtuse to the dangers of guns in the face of terrible rates of death. Just look at the murder statistics in Japan and European countries that have banned guns for the most simple explanation for why we need strict gun laws.

We also have issues just facing cold hard facts with who commits crime and why they should be locked up. I don’t want Charles Allen to tread the same ground that’s already been trodden by “examining the root causes of crime so as to develop a holistic approach to fighting it”. The causes are obvious: poverty, homes with one parent, or parents who aren’t around or who even care, etc. there are a million studies that show they root cause of crime.

And so, Charles Allen can kowtow to the self-flagellating criminal justice reform folks all he wants. He can waste money on all the “violence interruptors” and spend money on restorative justice, and Youth Rehabilitaton Act, and second chance act and all this other nonsense that is less effective than just tough on crime policing and arrest.

The facts are that some families get screwed because their father commit a violent crime or a teen gets locked up for murder. Or what have you. We need to enforce the law on violent crime. We could legalize other stuff like drugs, but we need to fight violent crime or it’s going to be 1990 all over again and families will leave and the tax base will dry up and it will suck again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Charles Allen is the most effective council member I've had since I've lived in DC. He is taking a thoughtful approach to crime and addressing its multiple causes. Yes, he doesn't get on a soapbox and yell about it, like some local pols. I used to be impressed that Denise Krepp was seeking crime data from the city but now it just looks like more bluster. I know it might make us feel better to hear it, but bluster doesn't stop crime either.

Thoughtful, yes. Effective is dependent on your perspective. I have tried to engage his office several times about the danger posed by Florida Avenue and the slowness of fixing it despite repeated crashes and injuries, including deaths. He seems disinterested. I think it's because it's the edge of his ward and he views his constituency as the (mostly white) people who live in the heart of Capitol Hill. Not those of us north of H, not people in Hill East, nor people in far SE. He is good at serving the needs of a specific group of people who think of themselves as Ward 6. But it's a huge ward (which is why it's being redistricted) with a lot of diverse concerns. He has chosen to focus on a certain demographic and serve them well, as well as appeal to their egos. But to say he's more effective than other politicians is to ignore his many, many blind spots.

Anonymous wrote:I think Charles Allen is the most effective council member I've had since I've lived in DC. He is taking a thoughtful approach to crime and addressing its multiple causes. Yes, he doesn't get on a soapbox and yell about it, like some local pols. I used to be impressed that Denise Krepp was seeking crime data from the city but now it just looks like more bluster. I know it might make us feel better to hear it, but bluster doesn't stop crime either.

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. I just way upped all my insurances because of all the car jackings and hit and runs on pedestrians and cyclists. Two carjackings in the last two weeks within a block of my house. Ward 6. All children. So sick of it.

Hope these kids meet the wrong person.