D.C.’s Crime Problem is More Complicated Than Some Would Have You Believe
By John Norton
“Rarely do we find men who willingly engage in hard, solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think.”
-Martin Luther King Jr.
My wife and I are parents of 2nd and 5th grade boys who attend John Lewis Elementary School in Washington, D.C. I thought about the above Dr. King quote during a recent school meeting in response to two neighborhood shootings — one on January 3rd and one on January 11th — that left two children who attend the school recovering from gunshot wounds.
The principal arranged for Ward 4 Councilmember Janeese Lewis George and Fourth District Metropolitan Police Commander Carlos Heraud to provide updates and answer questions from concerned parents.
The discussion validated the sentiments expressed in FAMM’s recent blog “To Mayor Bowser: Vetoing Necessary Justice Legislation is Not the Answer to Violent Crime”. When politicians fear monger about crime or dread being labeled soft-on-crime, the results are often predictable. They offer simplistic solutions such as draconian sentences that aren’t effective in actually making communities safer; while not fully embracing more comprehensive approaches to combating the seemingly intractable problem of crime.
For example, Heraud bemoaned how D.C.’s gun task force dedicated to stopping the flow of illegal guns often sees successful interdictions quickly swamped by the next batch of black market firearms from states like Virginia. I was surprised that a police commander actually said, “We can’t arrest our way out of this problem.” Heraud also indicated D.C. has a shortage of police officers despite the city offering $20,000 signing bonus for new hires.
D.C. is experiencing the same problems as other large American cities. Crime rates have risen in the 2020s after the previous decades had seen a downward trend in those numbers. As a result, the timing was less than optimal for D.C. to finish rewriting its criminal code for the first time in 100 years. Even if the timing wasn’t great, though, the rewrite was necessary and will lead to a truer justice system than before.
Unfortunately, Mayor Muriel Bowser chose to veto the rewrite — and as our previous blog points out, the repercussions of Mayor Bowser’s defensive crouch with regards to this bill are now upon us:
“Violent crime in D.C. is not a light matter. There have been several shootings and homicides in the past few years, and more of them have involved young people. However, punishing people already in prison, as well as people facing unjustly long sentences, is not the answer. Bowser’s veto is an example of throwing the baby out with the bath water — and even if it’s only symbolic, it’s a move that will lend fuel to the rhetoric of those opposed to the overhaul and legislation like it.”
The Council overrode Bowser’s veto, but because the city isn’t a state, final approval for the bill must go through the federal government. That means some elected officials will seize the opportunity to bolster their tough-on-crime credentials by denigrating the legislation without actually making D.C. any safer. Slate’s Mark Joseph Stein explains what those castigating the bill get wrong in his article “The Pundits Are Wrong about D.C.’s Crime Bill”:
“The legislation that D.C. passed in January is not a traditional reform bill, but the result of a 16-year process to overhaul a badly outdated, confusing, and often arbitrary criminal code. The revision’s goal was to modernize the law by defining elements of each crime, eliminating overlap between offenses, establishing proportionate penalties, and removing archaic or unconstitutional provisions. Every single change is justified in meticulous reports that span thousands of pages. Each one was crafted with extensive public input and support from both D.C. and federal prosecutors.”
Axios reporter Cuneyt Dil’s article “Scoop: Congress comes for D.C. crime laws” says Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) is spearheading efforts to block or undermine the legislation. Those efforts are likely to be launched this week with a resolution of disapproval in the House. The Senate could quickly follow suit.
While we wait for the Congressional theatrics to commence, more unhelpful commentary is being offered. Jack Evans, who served on the D.C. City Council from 1991 to 2020 and was its Judiciary Committee Chair, just wrote a short opinion piece for the Washington Post. Evans demands that the police force be rebuilt. He must have missed media report about the city’s officer recruitment efforts. These struggles are happening across the country as the New York Times recently reported, so I suspect Evan’s former colleagues on the Council rolled their eyes as he chimed in from the civilian cheap seats.
I hope we arrive at a time when fearmongering about crime becomes a political loser and serious efforts at problem solving carry the day. Unfortunately, the aforementioned tactic that was first popularized by Richard Nixon when he ran for president in 1968 shows no signs of lessening anytime soon. Meanwhile, people like my wife and I will keep going to meetings to learn about the real solutions that are being proposed and implemented — and how we can help those efforts.
John Norton is FAMM’s Communications Manager.
