Trump to take over D.C. Law Enforcement

Your characterization that they are harassing American citizens contradicts your claim that they are just taking selfies with tourists.

I'm not being hypocritical because I'm not seeing the harassment you keep touting.

They aren't going into those areas because they aren't trained to be in those areas, aren't carrying guns, and instead are designed to be a deterrent, hold potential criminals, and perform menial jobs to free up other resources to focus on reducing crime. We aren't talking about Seal Team 6 here but it seems like that is your characterization of them. The National Guard goes into areas hit by natural disasters actually carrying guns to prevent looting and that seems acceptable to you. I'm sorry but you seem to be mischaracterizing the use of the National Guard and I don't grasp that based on what i have seen.
So, were sending untrained people into this area to police them?

That's one of the things the former FBI agent I was listening to be interviewed today mentioned, how many of these people are not trained or equipped for this role, so maybe they shouldn't be in a role they are not trained or equipped for?
 
There are videos on this very thread of them doing both, actually: detaining delivery drivers and UberEats drivers making deliveries, detaining a woman from her vehicle at a checkpoint on 14th Street, and also just posted up taking selfies in front of Union Station. It's not an either/or. They're doing both. They're doing more of the latter, sure, but doing ANY of the former, to me, is a bridge too far. I am bewildered that anyone with any conservative bonafides at all would think that federalizing an American city using military personnel isn't overreach.

Your second paragraph yields valid points, but I'm confused as to what the whole purpose of this entire operation is, if it's not to actually reduce crime? There's no crime reduction happening by posting up on the National Mall. Nobody in Brentwood is criming any less because the National Guard is hanging out outside of the National Archives. So if the point is to reduce crime, then why not go where the crime is happening? And if the point is to perform menial jobs to free up other resources to focus on reducing crime, who is actually doing the crime reduction part of the equation?

I truly desire to see the reduction or elimination of violent crime as much as anyone. I just truly do not support the utilization of federal military personnel to do so. I think there are plenty of better ways to do it, but the problem is those don't make for good sound bytes and clips on Fox and social media.
Watch the video in this article and let me know your opinion.

 
What you got against gay porn? The Republican that ran for governor liked some trans porn, didn't he?

I don't believe bestiality porn is legal.
lol I don't have anything against gay porn. Just don't think it is popular in the hetero world, which is the overwhelming majority of the country. The point was to identify something less popular than midget porn. Whatever floats your boat.
 
So, were sending untrained people into this area to police them?

That's one of the things the former FBI agent I was listening to be interviewed today mentioned, how many of these people are not trained or equipped for this role, so maybe they shouldn't be in a role they are not trained or equipped for?
No
 
So this settlement arise from claims that some of the numbers were allegedly too low from 2018 to 2020? (And not murder rates but theft and assault, which are more easily manipulated by lesser charges)? The article is behind a paywall
So maybe there is more info there(?)
I know this will come as a shock, but the right-wing media is vastly overplaying this story. Here's a link (from a right-wing source) with a whole bunch of "damning" evidence.


So here's what the department admitted to: they started classifying thefts under $25 as "taking property without ownership" instead of theft II. That's it. That's the "down-classification."

Here's what that Djoussou alleged: that in a case she worked, the night watchman didn't charge an offense as assault with a deadly weapon when a knife was allegedly thrown at the victim. Except as the attached transcript of the recording shows, she apparently did not really know the law -- but more importantly, she called the captain at 4:30 AM for an "emergency" report. And the captain was not interested in what amounted to a judgment call. There might have been a knife thrown, but it did not hit anyone and the victim -- who did suffer some injuries from fisticuffs -- declined to be hospitalized.

Obviously a thrown knife can be an assault with a dangerous weapon, but the elements of the crime are under-specified. I'm not even sure where they reside, because they are not defined in the statute. There's an example from the DC Metro Police training manual to suggest that a man who waves a knife around could be committing an assault punishable by up to 10 years in jail. That is obviously excessive, and the captain talking to Djoussou made that point. He asked if throwing a shoe should be classified as ADW, and she said no, that would be excessive, and the captain said that the shoe technically qualifies under the relevant authority. And so they discussed how a judgment call must be made.

The captain also referred to the model jury instruction for that offense as a reason not to upcharge. I didn't find that, but it would make sense if the jury instructions narrow the crime a bit. For instance, there might be an instruction about what must be shown for a thrown object to be dangerous. Djoussou seemed to be under the impression that a knife thrown in any direction would be ADW as long as there was also a simple assault. That seems wrong. She revised it to the victim "dodged" but who knows what the actual evidence for that would be.

In any event, Djoussou did not allege, from my skim of the material, any pattern as to this down charging -- but rather, this was a one-off and because she questioned the captain's judgment, she was retaliated against. I don't know -- calling the captain at 4:30 AM for the express purpose of a "notification" might make them a bit pissed off.

The only down charging the department admitted to, and the only that I've seen alleged, is charging a theft of less than $25 as a lesser offense punishable by 90 instead of 180 days in jail.
 
Appreciate you sharing that. That’s good to have the context. Then who is detaining delivery drivers? I guess it’s ICE maybe? That’s still a distinction without a difference to me. Federal personnel are patrolling the streets of an American city apprehending American citizens for…what purpose? THAT’s the problem I have and what I don’t understand. I promise I’m not trying to be dense or combative- I’m just genuinely trying to understand why anyone of any political persuasion is cool with this.
Its a horrible written article but there are some details in it that are relevant.

"In other parts of the city, federal agents were spotted conducting traffic stops and making arrests. Charges over the first two nights have included assault with a deadly weapon, homicide, drug possession with intent to distribute, unlawful entry, resisting arrest, lewd acts, stalking, reckless driving, and driving under the influence, the official said. Thirteen illegal firearms have been seized since Monday night."
 
We all know this isn't about crime prevention.

It's a show and a test.
Pretty successful couple of nights.

In other parts of the city, federal agents were spotted conducting traffic stops and making arrests. Charges over the first two nights have included assault with a deadly weapon, homicide, drug possession with intent to distribute, unlawful entry, resisting arrest, lewd acts, stalking, reckless driving, and driving under the influence, the official said. Thirteen illegal firearms have been seized since Monday night."
 

I seriously doubt whether her stories are true, but even if it is true it does more to illustrate just how easily frightened and fearful Americans are instead of how bad crime is in DC. As has already been noted, they're not even patrolling the most dangerous parts and neighborhoods of the city.
 
I have sympathy for the homeless and they should receive help BUT not allowed to live on the streets, harassing citizens and making life miserable for tax paying citizens and destroying the quality of life for urban dwellers. Thank you Daddy Trump!
 
Back
Top