 |
| Silverfiddle Rant! |
Its a sad commentary that a police chief has to state what was once considered obvious common sense in this nation:
Washington DC Police Chief at the scene of another violent crime
"You cannot coddle violent criminals," he said. "They might not want a job. They might not need services… They may need to be off our streets."
He also decried reductions in police personnel: "The reality is we have a shrinking workforce. I have a definitive amount of resources. 200 and some officers less this year than I had last year."
He also decried reductions in police personnel: "The reality is we have a shrinking workforce. I have a definitive amount of resources. 200 and some officers less this year than I had last year."
That chief must realize that he is endangering his job.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what epiphany he had.
He's just passing the buck in the old DC "who's got the monkey" bureaucratic shuffle.
DeleteTime spent complaining to the media is time not spent enforcing the law. Cut his budget again.
DeleteIf crime is *really* that bad in DC, ease up on private gun ownership restrictions there. It's a lot easier to get criminals off the streets with meat wagons and power washers. No cops required.
DeleteCrime rates in DC are less than half of what they were last year in most categories.
DeleteCut this guy's budget and the budget of the guy that funds his budget.
Either that, or simple expand Nancy Pelosi's "Green Zone".
DeleteWhy pay for "both"?
DeleteI'm sorry I have to reject this guy's premises. He wears a badge, so I'm already inclined to believe he's lying his ass off. Are we sure he gave his name correctly? I digress. How window-lickingly stupid do you have to be to believe these shootings wouldn't have happened if "moar cawps wuz on da beat?" It's highly unlikely any cops would have shown up, much less any faster, and they still would have shown up after the shooting occured regardless.
DeleteBesides, it violates a Supreme Court ruling to expect police services. *Especially in DC*
If crime is *really* that bad in DC, ease up on private gun ownership restrictions there.
Delete+1000
Lots of things are common sense. For example, it seems obvious to me that the more you starve social services of funding, the more cases are going to end catastrophically as police matters. This chief's attitude towards those preventative services ("coddling", "fluffy" etc.) is typical of his profession but unhelpful. I think he underestimates how much a modest increase in social services spending could reduce his workload.
ReplyDeleteLack of court sittings during lockdown is a separate issue.
Sort of jumping to the conclusion that you know what he means by "coddling criminals." I took it to mean giving them unemployment when they are not looking for work and/or decline to accept a job offer. ("They might not want a job.") Not prosecuting them shoplifting under $950. ("They might not need services" because they're making a good living from crime.)
DeleteMaybe. Chief could've helped me out by getting to the point a bit quicker. What do you think he meant by "fluffy"?
DeleteDon't know what he meant by "fluffy."
DeleteOh, I don’t know, Jez. It seems to me that when you increase social services because you’re concerned about violence in the streets, what you’re actually doing is trying to bribe punks away from killing, maiming, raping, or terrorizing the public. I understand you’re not living in the US, and so perhaps things are different in Merry Old England. Probably not though, given your prison population.
ReplyDeleteThe Maryland NAACP released a report stating, “ ... the ready access to a lifetime of welfare and free social service programs is a major contributory factor to the crime problems we face today.” This conclusion was confirmed by the US Department of Health and Human Services, within which researchers Drs. June O’Neill and Anne Hill demonstrated a 50% increase in the monthly value of combined AFDC and food stamp benefits led to a 117% increase in violent crime in black communities.
Maybe what we need, rather than more social services programs (which aren’t working to curtail welfare, but actually toward expanding it) is fathers in the homes. Children from single-parent black homes are twice as likely to exhibit anti-social behavior and twice as likely to commit crimes than are the black children from two-parent homes. Seventy percent of juveniles in state reform institutions come from fatherless homes; 43% of prison inmates come from fatherless homes. There is also a correlation between welfare and out-of-wedlock births, the conclusions of which are supported by thirteen separate studies of the relationship between the availability of welfare benefits and out of wedlock births. Of these, eleven studies found a statistically significant correlation. Generally, it was found that a fifty percent increase in social services led to a 43% increase in out-of-wedlock births among teenage girls. A University of Washington study found that an increase in welfare benefits of $200/month increased out-of-wedlock births among teenaged girls by 150%.
Personally, given these studies and findings, I’d have to say that your assertion is a tired old shoe, and one that has been disproved numerous times. Meanwhile, young people accused of murder in some locations in the USA are being almost immediately released from pre-trial incarceration only to end up back on the court docket for additional murders and mayhem.
There is a different point of view, though: if you take a home invader, rapist, someone who is attempting to knife, shoot, or bludgeon someone, or rape or rob them, and shoot him dead, he won’t be invading any more homes or scaring the bejesus out of any more citizens, and probably won’t be making any more bastard babies, either.
We need more guns in the hands of responsible citizens who simply refuse to allow punks to push them around. In this country, if you need a copper, you call a copper and then wait twenty minutes to an hour (unless you report “officer down”). On the other hand, if someone breaks into your home, your car, or molests you on the street, the whole episode can be over in less than ten seconds. Conclusion: we don’t need more social services; we need more guns — which when you think about it, do provide an important social service.
I'm talking about social work more than welfare expenditure. The idea is to invest in and support troubled individuals (children, often) before they turn violent.
DeleteThe US already spends 30% of its GDP on social services. Every school campus has a staff of social workers. Every county has a viable social services program. As I suggested earlier, the programs we have now aren’t working because by the time social services professionals enter the picture, it’s already too late.
DeleteIf you know about early child development, then you also know that the first few weeks of a child’s life is a critical period in determining how they subsequently develop as human beings. Infants abandoned to their cribs while immature teen mothers frolic in the next room, or children dropped off with granny to raise after age two, denies that child of important nurturing. This sort of thing happens far more often than most people realize.
If I haven’t argued it here before, others have: the fix within any black community rests with black community leaders and citizens who want a new direction in their lives. Difficult problems do not lend themselves to easy solutions. So far, I’ve not been impressed with the efforts of black culture to acknowledge their problem and take a pro-active approach in solving them. I know there are plenty of good people who work hard to turn the tide of violence in minority neighborhoods, but they seem to be shoveling muck against the tide. As with the homeless problem, it must be very frustrating for those who do try to make a difference. I simply think the numbers are staggering.
The lesson unlearned is that serious problems cannot be fixed from outside the problematic environment, no matter how much money you throw at it. It would be helpful if there wasn’t so much corruption built into “social services.” More than a few of our “black leaders” have made a fortune from milking the horrid biases of low expectation. Throwing cash into a burning building does nothing for the either the cash or the building. At some point, individuals have to come to some understanding about who they are and what they want to become. No increase in social services expenditures will accomplish that. Available evidence tells us that social coddling doesn’t work as well as “tough love.” Somebody needs to get a clue.
I'm certain that we disagree on many points, my response here is for clarification and to underline some points of agreement.
DeleteI think a lot of funding for preventative measures has been drying up over time (see https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/funding-for-housing-health-and-social-services-block-grants-has-fallen -- the tables break it down by category). But I do not dispute your point that $s alone are not the complete story, if it would be sufficient to spend the same amount or less more carefully, then that is what I desire.
"So far, I’ve not been impressed with the efforts of black culture to acknowledge their problem and take a pro-active approach in solving them..."
Seems they're not impressed with the police etc. either. My point is that we can make useful progress by seeking out and exploiting opportunities for collaboration rather than relying by default on the adversarial application of force. I recognise that it is legitimate use force to protect citizens from criminals, but in my opinion, where cooperative approaches are applicable they are often a great deal more effective and far better value for money.
Sorry, but the government is unqualified to provide social services and represent a moral hazard to the entire social services project.
DeleteGovernment is only required when a use of force is required. For all "other" social projects, apply a free market or volunteer solution please.
DeleteGovernment can never be a substitute for a mother and father intact family. No matter how wonderful the program may be
DeleteI urge everyone to go back and read mustangs first comment about the statistics of this.
It's a wonderful point but I thought you wanted us to comment on the chief's remarks.
Delete@Mustang
DeleteI could not agree more that any community must fix itself. We keep putting homeless people in shelters, for instance, which most of them hate worse than the street. We give them houses or apartments, which they once had and could not keep.
The same applies to individuals. I cannot fix your self image problem by addressing you by the pronoun of your choice. You will not become the Queen of England if I address you as "your majesty."
Crime rates in the United States are on a 30+ year downward trend. As near as I can find, DC's crime rates are a part of this decline. There literally isn't a spectre of rising crime to fight really anywhere. What exactly is this police chief on about? Crime in DC has dropped significantly over at least the last two years, simultaneously with its reduced police manpower. We're we not supposed to fact check this guy?
ReplyDeleteThat said, in years past, St. Louis cut its crime rate significantly by shredding police reports...
ReplyDeleteProbably not far from the truth...
DeleteHide the evidence....
DeleteHere's a good article on DC Crime. 2020 crime was up from 2019. 2021 is about on par with 2020. Lower overall numbers can mostly be attributed to less property crime.
ReplyDeleteI don't provide this to argue one way or the other, but just to add some facts to the conversation.
DC Crime Rate- What's Really Happening
Lockdown must have affected crime patterns enormously.
DeleteDC probably needs to bring in a few more thousand national guardsmen from Minnesota -- you know, just in case another unarmed protester needs to be put down. Maybe the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could help. More barbed wire, perhaps. I agree with TC .... cuts in police staffing seems to equate to lower crime levels. Hmmm.
DeleteMy sticking point in the "defund the police / fund social services instead" dichotomy is all the legal precedents entrenched to protect cops when they either don't do their job at all or really screw up at doing their job. All the pro-police arguments rest on the assumption that we need them around to respond to a call that they are absolutely not obligated to answer. Trying to decide who we're blowing welfare dollars on is a false dichotomy.
DeleteAt least a declaration of victory in the "War on Covid" is on the horizon!
ReplyDeleteJoe Biden and Anthony Fauci SAVED us ALL!