Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee,Hearing On Encouraging Innovative and Cost-Effective Crime Reduction StrategiesMarch 3, 2010Today, the Committee returns to the critical issue of finding the best strategies for reducing crime. I chaired a hearing in the last Congress on this issue, and we now consider what the next steps can and should be. We will hear about innovative approaches that are working in police departments and criminal justice systems across the country, and examine what the Federal Government can do to encourage the adoption of approaches that work to keep our communities safe. I hope we can make bipartisan progress on this issue. We all want to effectively and efficiently reduce crime and keep our neighborhoods safe.In the 1990s, with the leadership of then-Senator Joe Biden and others, we passed legislation to create and fund the COPS program and other important initiatives, which put thousands of new officers on the street and encouraged innovative policing strategies. Law enforcement leaders in cities and towns throughout the country, bolstered by this national support, revolutionized the way policing was done throughout the country. These efforts led to the unprecedented drops in violent crime we saw during the 1990s.That progress stalled in the last decade as Federal funding for state and local law enforcement dried up, and Federal attention to finding the best approaches to reducing crime wavered. Rates of crime stayed largely stagnant, despite skyrocketing incarceration rates, and some communities saw significant resurgences in violent crime. One of the factors that prevented the crime problem from worsening in the last decade was continuing innovation at the local level. Enterprising police chiefs, hard working law enforcement officers, judges and community leaders worked together to find new and more effective crime reduction strategies, and many communities saw this work pay good dividends. The economic downturn has put an even greater strain on our communities efforts to keep crime rates down. In response to this growing crisis, Congress and the President acted decisively, including $4 billion in Federal assistance to state and local law enforcement in last year s stimulus legislation. I fought hard for that funding, and the results are already being felt. Crime rates are coming down as police departments are adding or retaining officers and implementing new initiatives.Even with this help, though, police departments and criminal justice systems remain short on resources. More money alone will not solve the problem. It is important that cities and towns use their resources in the ways that have been proven to work best.We will hear today from leaders in the field who have been setting good examples for how our communities can make their law enforcement and crime reduction efforts work well. Chief Mike Schirling from Burlington, Vermont, has brought significant innovation to a small city police force. He has implemented comprehensive community policing and partnerships with all levels of law enforcement and with schools and community groups. He is exploring the use of alternative sanctions to set low-level offenders on the right path before they enter the criminal justice system, targeted programs to address mental health needs, consolidation of resources to help police departments function more efficiently, and the use of new technology to share information more effectively.Chief Rodney Monroe has made great progress in Richmond and now Charlotte with initiatives like using technology to pinpoint law enforcement efforts and integrating law enforcement with economic development and job training. Colonel Dean Esserman has made Providence into a national leader in community-based policing. Chief Patrick Berarducci has also brought innovation to a small city police force.There are good examples from across the country. Cities like Los Angeles and Chicago are seeing results with gang outreach and mediation initiatives. Thinkers on crime reduction strategy like Jeremy Travis and David Kennedy with the National Network for Safe Communities have helped communities throughout the country effectively tackle intractable crime problems. The HOPE program in Hawaii has shown that probation supervision with swift and certain consequences can greatly reduce recidivism. Many jurisdictions have had great success with juvenile prevention and reentry programs.Today s witnesses come from communities that look like much of America and prove that innovative and effective crime reduction approaches are not restricted to the biggest cities with the greatest resources. I hope that by highlighting these successes, we can encourage other communities to follow their lead.I believe the Federal Government can and must help by spreading the word about strategies that work, and also by targeted funding and support. We have seen in Burlington and in many other cities that an initial Federal investment can make possible initiatives that would not be possible otherwise. These programs are inexpensive and cost effective. Over time, they should more than pay for themselves by reducing the costs of crime, improving local economies and creating jobs, and reducing the need for federal assistance. I know there is disagreement about Federal support for state and local law enforcement. I hope there can be broad bipartisan agreement on supporting cost effective strategies that work to keep our communities safer.Source: LEahy’s office. 3.2.2010# # # # # Burlington Police Chief Michael E Schirling testified Tuesday afternoon before a congressional panel chaired by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). Leahy invited Schirling to testify at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Encouraging Innovative and Cost-Effective Crime Reduction Strategies.Leahy has made state and local law enforcement issues a priority for the Judiciary Committee this Congress. He dedicated the first hearing of the 111th Congress to examining the needs of state and local law enforcement. Last year, Leahy worked to secure $4 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for state and local law enforcement, including the successful Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program. Twenty-five police departments in Vermont were recipients of COPS funding included in the ARRA. In 2008, Leahy twice brought the Judiciary Committee to Vermont to hear testimony about community efforts to address crime. We have seen in Burlington and in many other cities that an initial Federal investment can make possible initiatives that would not be possible otherwise, Leahy said at the hearing. These programs are inexpensive and cost effective. Over time, they should more than pay for themselves by reducing the costs of crime, improving local economies, creating jobs, and reducing the need for federal assistance. Schirling testified about the Burlington Police Department s success in developing and enhancing community policing. Over the last 11 years, our policing paradigm shifted from a response-based model to one embracing the core tenets of community policing partnership and problem solving with an eye toward preventing crime and mitigating disorder on our streets and in our neighborhoods, said Schirling. We believe that critical law enforcement innovation can occur not just in traditional policing endeavors, but also in other areas. Chief Schirling has brought significant innovation to a small city police force, said Leahy. He has implemented comprehensive community policing and partnerships with all levels of law enforcement and with schools and community groups.Police departments across the country are facing cutbacks in resources and funding during difficult economic times, and are increasingly looking to local business and community organizations to help identify and implement innovative strategies to address violence and crime.Audio and video footage will be available later this afternoon.An archived webcast will be available online later today. # # # # #
The Redskins announced that Haskins was questionable to return with an ankle injury during the Week 16 matchuop. He later was downgraded to doubtful to return, with a twist: Redskins owner Dan Snyder reportedly came down to field level and advised Haskins to stay out of the game.“It’s an ankle. I’ll be alright.”He says Dan Snyder told him not to go back in. The owner came down from the box to the medical area and told him to be smart and not go back in.— Craig Hoffman (@CraigHoffman) December 22, 2019It’s certainly an interesting tactic considering the Redskins and Giants were jockeying for position in the 2020 NFL Draft. The Giants went on to win the game in overtime, temporarily dropping them down in the draft order to the No. 4 pick. The Redskins currently sit at the No. 2 overall pick and potentially could select Ohio State’s Chase Young.Haskins, Washington’s 2019 first-round pick, was in the midst of a difficult rookie year but looked like he started turning his season around two starts ago, throwing 5 touchdowns to 1 interception over his last three starts, including Sunday. Redskins quarterback Dwayne Haskins had a painful exit from Sunday’s tank-off against the Giants, and that exit also signaled the end of his rookie season.The rookie QB was having arguably his best game of the season in Week 16, completing 12 of 15 passes for 133 yards and 2 touchdowns vs. division-rival New York. In the third quarter, Haskins was hit low, and he subsequently exited the game. MORE: 2020 NFL Mock DraftDid not look good for Dwayne Haskins. #Redskins #NYGvsWAS pic.twitter.com/fRlL8yP51R— Scott Rogust (@ScottRogust) December 22, 2019Haskins was able to walk off the field on his own power, but he was carted to the locker room after reaching the sideline. On Monday, Washington interim head coach Bill Callahan revealed that Haskins’ season was done after an MRI revealed a high-ankle sprained.
When Samsung launched the Galaxy J3 2016 edition in April, it rested its laurels on the S-Bike Mode; a “hardware and software solution to not only propagate responsible riding but also ensure a tension free ride.” Developed inside Samsung’s Indian R&D centres, the S-Bike Mode was geared towards bringing biking and mobility together. On Monday, the company expanded its J series portfolio with the launch of the new Galaxy J7 and Galaxy J5 2016 editions. Technically, these phones are superior to the Galaxy J3 2016 as well as the Galaxy J7 and Galaxy J5 of last year, and yet they don’t stand out — in any way — in the ever-expanding universe of mid-range smartphones. The Galaxy J7 and Galaxy J5 2016 editions give out the same old feeling back again and that’s not necessarily a good thing.Also Read: Samsung launches Galaxy J5, J7 2016 editions, prices start at Rs 13,990 Samsung has undoubtedly been making some good-looking phones ever since the Galaxy S6 came up. It’s nice to see Samsung continuing with the trend in its mid-range and affordable smartphone segment as well. This means, Samsung’s upper mid-range Galaxy A and lower mid-range Galaxy J line-up phones look just alright, nay better as opposed to say its phones from two years ago. It’s safe to say that the Galaxy J5 and J7 2016 editions retain Samsung’s new-found feel-good factor. Both the phones look (and feel) way better than the Galaxy J3 2016 in every sense of the word.Boasting of an all-plastic body, the rear of these phones comes with a brushed metal finish, which appears metal from afar. While in the hands, the finish adds a much-needed comfort element to them. The Galaxy J5 and J7 2016 editions appeared quite sturdy and well put together in our brief usage. The rear panel is removable, but the battery isn’t. The outer-frame is made of metal which adds ups to the phones’ premium quotient. The back sort of eases into the frame, while chamfers on the front ensure the device stays put in your hand.advertisementThe build quality (and materials used) may not be in the same league as say the LeEco Le 1S or the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3, but it’s definitely out there somewhere with the best in the business. The right edge houses the power button while the left edge has the volume rocker, in line with typical Samsung fashion.Both the phones sport 720p Super AMOLED displays. But, while the Galaxy J5 2016 has a 5.2-inch screen, the Galaxy J7 2016 has a larger 5.5-inch one. Samsungs Super AMOLED panels are among the best in the business. Sadly, they do little justice in the case of these new phones, even more so on the larger 5.5-inch display of the Galaxy J7 2016. Colours appear slightly washed out and brightness levels are well below phones like the Le 1S and the Xiaomi Mi 4i.The Galaxy J7 (2016) is powered by a 1.6GHz octa-core Exynos 7870 processor coupled with 2GB of RAM and 16GB of internal memory which is further expandable by up to 128GB via microSD card. The Galaxy J5 (2016) on the other hand comes with a humble 1.2GHz quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 processor coupled with 2GB of RAM. Internal memory stays put at 16GB and expandable storage is supported. Both the phones support dualSIM (dual standby), 4G LTE and NFC connectivity options. Software-wise they run Android 6.0 Marshmallow-based TouchWiz user interface which is a first for any Samsung lower mid-range phone.The new Samsung phones do seem less potent when compared to rival phones in and around their price point. Without taking anything away from them for now, let’s just say we found the phones pretty nippy and responsive in our brief usage. We however reserve our final verdict on the same for our full review.The Galaxy J5 and J7 2016 editions sport similar camera hardware, which is a 13-megapixel shooter on the rear with f/1.9 aperture, LED flash and a 5-megapixel front-facing selfie shooter with LED flash.While the Galaxy J5 2016 is backed by a 3,100mAh battery, the Galaxy J7 2016 uses a bigger 3,300mAh battery.Additionally, the phones also include the S-Bike Mode along with key Samsung take aways like Ultra Data and Ultra Power Saving Mode.Also Read: Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) quick review: One for the roadComing to the pricing. The Galaxy J7 (2016) and Galaxy J5 (2016) phones have been priced at Rs 15,990 and Rs 13,990 respectively which kind of puts them in a tight spot. This is because, unlike the Galaxy J3 (2016), these phones are lacking on any compelling feature that would make them stand out. There are better phones that are priced lower than them, which doesn’t speak well of them. Besides, the Moto G4 is on its way. The way we see it, things do look a tad out of place for the Galaxy J7 (2016) and Galaxy J5 (2016). Watch this space for our full review of the Samsung Galaxy J5, J7 2016 editions.advertisement