Anonymous User
Pro
Related Posts
Bowl Leader
Hope my fellow POC are doing well!
Enthusiast
Adderall withdrawal ain't no joke
Any good ETFs to invest Roth into?
Additional Posts in Politics
Pro
Chief
Rising Star
Chief
Anyone thinks like me?
Chief
Rising Star
Visual Storyteller
Visual Storyteller
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Chief
Yes, it shouldn’t be surprising that creating a police state will cause a drop in crime.
It’s also unconstitutional (yes, DC is a bit of an edge case compared to other states).
Let’s just call a spade a spade…
You enforce martial law (or something very similar in this case) in blue cities in blue states… call the mayors, governors, congressmen and senators incompetent, idiots, yada yada…
You ignore the stats that show that crime is a bigger problem in red states, especially violent crime (rape, murder, felony assault), and don’t “make their cities safe again”, because you can’t call the mayors, governors, congressman or senators incompetent, idiots, a disgrace, yada yada, because they’re “friendly” to the administration…
It would be an embarrassment, to state and local government; and to the administration to have headlines that talk about red states…
I think if Trump & Co. would just admit that, we would all say, alright, it’s political theater to give FoxNews something to talk about… meanwhile your most loyal voters are getting shot in the ass…
Pro
Sounds good USAA! Maybe this model should be applied to Republican states and cities with high crime rates too! Oh, wait, that's right, this whole thing is about political point scoring and distracting everyone from the Epstein Files.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/01/us/politics/crime-republican-states.html?unlocked_article_code=1.i08.vltp.OhrwGBHg7Z9d&smid=url-share
Even in the Red States, the major metropolitan areas are controlled by Democrats. So it's not exactly accurate when you refer to high crime in Red states when the crime is largely centered in the Blue portions of those states. Texas, for instance, is a majority Republican state, but Trump only won 42.4% of the votes in Harris County (Houston), it's most populous county. Democrats control most of the elected county offices (sheriff, county attorney, etc.). Dallas, Austin, San Antonio and El Paso are also controlled by Democrats. Unsurprisingly, most of the crime occurs in the large metro areas. Is it because of the population? Or the governance? I'll say that my friends in law enforcement HATE having to deal with the DAs in Harris County because they're loathe to press charges on criminals.
Pro
Yep, it's sort of like Covid lockdowns. Make everyone stay home and crime plummets. So does business and the local economy.
Pro
"We know that when carjackings go down, when use of guns goes down, when homicide or robbery go down, neighborhoods feel safer and are safer, so this surge has been important to us," said Bowser
This isn’t really a surprise. More law enforcement = reduced crime. I do think this is a major vulnerability for the left, who too often seems to just shrug off crime as if it’s no different than bad weather. I’m surprised at how quickly this worked, but it does go to show that urban areas can actually reduce crime if they choose to. Mayor Bowser recognizes which way the political winds are blowing on this issue.
That said, I worry how sustainable this is. How long can federal resources supplement local PD? What happens when they leave? Will local government be willing to adequately replace them?
And of course, what are the legal options to replicate this in other cities?
B2, You're making a few claims that deserve to be addressed directly:
1) More law enforcement = less crime
2) Local governments deliberately withheld available resources for law enforcement and judicial reforms
3) Federal military intervention is the only viable solution
#1 is more nuanced than that, but for this instance, I'll agree directionally and as long as the discussion remains focused on this situation, I won't protest.
#2 seems like political spin to the point of falsehood. I haven't read every available article, but what I have read doesn't lead me to believe that the majority in DC government think crime is no big deal and are rejecting valid proposed solutions just because they want to.
#3 is hopefully just hyperbole because it's completely indefensible. We don't even have enough evidence yet to determine whether it's viable or a solution, let alone whether all other options have been exhausted. If the Trump administration really wanted to help DC address crime and wasn't just politically maneuvering, they could have taken many other approaches other than taking us closer to martial law.
If we believe martial law is the "only viable solution," we have already lost the war.
Pro
I bet it’s short term. Once everyone gets used to it things will go back to the status quo.
Pro
But then we will know the it is a perception problem for people who don’t live there. A change back to traditional crime levels will show that the locals like it that way. And should be left to live as they like, unencumbered.
Pro
I’m sure North Korea says the same thing about their military run cities…
Pro
Who’s surprised that spending hundreds of millions of dollars (annualized) on law enforcement in a city of under a million people, will reduce crime.
Chief
And if you took away funding, it might increase crime.
And he slashed this funding in DC and other major cities across the country.
Hold on. I was screaming and crying two weeks ago that the DC crime stats weren't reliable. Am I allowed to brag about them now? 🥹