Thursday night after work, I was able to go on a ride-along through the Sixth District, including Anacostia and other parts south east of the Capitol. While on the ride along, I was able to talk a bit with each officer about the trends they see in crime; their thoughts on what promotes it and what best combats it; how they thought public housing affects crime; how they though public housing is doing generally, both in how it serves the individuals and its effectiveness; and how they thought the city ought to make changes in the way it combats crime and helps the poor. I also was able to witness, first-hand, the different policing styles and the subjectivity in application of the law. While social programs are always created with the intent of helping people and making up for what they’ve missed out on in society, if not properly executed they are both a detriment to the individual’s growth and they’re a waste of taxpayer dollars.
.
I will begin where my ride-along started, which is with the near-arrest of three 20-somethings that were driving in Clay Terrace, the worse public housing complex in the Sixth District, their grandmother’s rented car that was past due. Having been the second police car to arrive, Officer --------- was not the primary on the incident and, therefore, was not in charge of making decisions regarding arrests. Although the three individuals met the requirements for the unauthorized use of a vehicle, the primary officer did not arrest them because he believed that they were simply stuck in an unfortunate situation. This decision was out of the norm, as the officer was asked to explain his reasoning to dissenting officers on 4 different occasions. Even -------------- thought that it was a “cut-and-dry UV.” From what I could gather, this differing decision was a result of two things: the particular officer’s compassion for people and the fact that the occupants of the vehicle were dressed fairly well, were respectful, and had a dialect that was, for the most part, free of slang. I think that while their respect had a significant impact — as it rightfully should — on the officer’s decision, I believe that the first and last factors did as well.
.
To begin the discussion on housing, I will start with ----------‘s brief description of the history of public housing in D.C. In the 1960s and 1070s there was a large expansion of social programs and, consequently, a large number of public housing units were built. The prevailing thought was that, if all of the underprivileged were gathered together through a common, free place to live, then that area could be flooded with services such as vocational training, health care, child care, and the like. This way, some of the burdens they experience being poor, would be alleviated in the hopes that they would be able to work to a point where they could be self-sufficient.
.
This is a great plan in theory, but having neglected the fact that these services would be the first to be cut during an economic downturn, public housing units have turned into quagmires for uninspired people, crime, and poor living conditions. Additionally, the simple fact that housing is free makes public housing a frustrating predicament in that, while it allows for people to currently live under a roof it: 1) disincentivizes legal work because as soon as the individual begins working, they no longer qualify for public housing, have to pay for their own housing, and have to work; 2) makes public housing seem standard and normal because the individual grows up within a community that does not work and does not see the opportunity for a better future; and 3) allocates a group of people that have nothing to do all day and, in turn, end up drinking.
.
Having always been focused on meeting the needs of people, I neglected to consider the long-term effects of providing for them. Now, I am not entirely abandoning my caretaker mentality, but rather recognizing that it is not a benefit to provide for people unconditionally. Rather than the current public housing system, one with restrictions on certain habits, such as drinking and smoking, would be appropriate. For anyone that would argue that it violates their freedom, I would counter that they are free to live elsewhere and drink all they want, but when they’re living off someone else’s money, regulations ought to be allowed. Similarly, I would advocate for well-defined time periods in which a person is allowed to live in public housing. In the same way that a person is not allowed to collect unemployment checks indefinitely, public housing ought to be cut off at some predetermined point. Obviously, this would not include people with disabilities, who are not able to work.
.
In sum, while my ride-along with the Metropolitan Police Department was not action-packed, it provided me with the unique opportunity for conversations with police officers who deal with the effects of effective and ineffective social policies, specifically public housing. Seeing it up-close forced me to grapple with the reality of tangible money being wasted, because when removed from the situation, it can become too easy to accept ineffective social programs instead of working toward better solutions, leaving the individuals worse-off and the taxpayers out more money.
No comments:
Post a Comment