PUT UP SIGNS PLEASE- This is wonderful. AND would be even more effective if there were signs posted along the routes where people frequently disturb the peace so that they know about the new law. The warning signs may actually quiet more people than whatever small number of arrests the police will have the time to make. For example, how frequently can a squad car happen to be at the corner of Prospect and 34th at 1am when someone speeds by with music blasting out of their car? But if the driver sees the signs, there's at least a chance that they will reconsider. Same for the pedestrians who walk through these streets that are essentially acoustical amphitheaters created by rows of brick townhouses. Let's make sure people get the message at the right time and place, and have an opportunty to adapt behavior, then follow-up as needed. Signs will send the message- and give residents something real to point to if they need to "remind" people about the law.

Wonderful? Possibly if you envision a society akin to "Fahrenheit 451", or in Bradbury's "The Pedestrian", where a man is arrested simply for walking on the street at night. Is everybody in the neighborhood entitled to a peaceful atmosphere, particularly at night? Absolutely. Is it reasonable to detain an individual due to making a noise? A noise!... Next time I am in New York city, ten thousand cabbies are going to be arrested by the time I am done there.

When you live in a city, you expect a certain level of street noise, and if you live near a school, you expect a certain level of college-related noise. What's even more absurd is the citizens of Georgetown that complain about noise and University-related disturbance.

This externality is priced into the market value of the home, and I am quite certain that nobody living in Georgetown today preceded the founding of the University. Maybe local residents are just not satisfied with the nearly 200 percent markup in the value of their homes as a direct result of their proximity to the University, and increasing as the University continues to climb in the rankings. Misguided greed is really what lies at the heart of these complaints.

Bottom line, this needs to be repealed, as it is a gross exercise in unlawful extension of police power.

You mean if you live near a highly rated Jesuit university attended by brilliant future leaders of our society you should be willing to pay the price, in fact feel privileged to be awakened at 2am, 4am by screaming, fighting, urinating on your property, drunk-out of their minds students age 21 and up? You mean that if you're 21, black, unemployed, living in Anacostia because there is no way out and you're drunk, screaming at the top of your lungs while urinating on someone's property at 3am, you should be arrested for disturbing the peace...but not if you're a Georgetown student? Georgetown residents are greedy? We want the profit but won't tolerate the noise- which if we tolerate tells these already privileged kids they are entitled to infringe on other people's basic needs- like sleep? No. We have a civic duty to teach all young people what being a respectful member of society means. No amount of eventual real estate profit will allow my conscience to abandon that responsibility...any more than my own kids making an adolescent comparison to Fahrenheit 451 would bully me into letting them blast music after midnight imposing sleepless nights on my neighbors. If Georgetown wants to become a community of narcissists raising narcissists, repeal all the laws and watch the brick of your house, real estate prices, ethics, morality, and society deteriorate into dirt because you couldn't stand up to a drunk Jesuit student urinating on your house while screaming obscenities at 4am.

Before I reply, I should mention that having recently purchased a home in West Georgetown, I am both a member of the "community" and University. It would seem- being a member of this community- that the vast majority of people living here are quite opposed to this amendment, but a very vocal minority, including the previous commenter, seem to think that blaring police sirens are a better sound than mild street and pedestrian noise on weekend nights that is even less that what would be expected in a college town. (And my home is on Prospect, known as the "noisiest")

To the previous commenter:
Considering that your entire argument is ad hominem, you really don't make any substantial claims. I hope everyone sees how absurd and offensive that your post is, and I hope this is not representative of the fellow members of the community. It certainly does not represent my point of view.

Your "civic duty" in no way entails teaching another adult a "lesson." If the rest of your post wasn't so poorly written and downright offensive, I could write at length about what is -and more important isn't your "civic duty."

This is not a matter of University vs. community, because, as I said, the University students accounts for the vast majority of population in West Georgetown. Obviously, this previous commenter is not representative of the majority of Georgetown, and I hope, with the help of all member of the community, that we can get this amendment appealed.

Let me get this straight.
If the White House were to host an evening reception for a foreign leader who was known to be a human rights violator; and a citizen of the United States chose to hold up a sign and protest through speech, with the intent of disrupting a lawful congregation, he/she could be arrested? Really?
And at the discretion (and bias) of the police officer who is duty bound to enforce the law, not to ajudicate it (sounds like the old west: "C'mon sherriff, let's have a hangin' party before the circut judge comes to town.") let alone any discussion of equal protection under the law. Unbelievable!
I live in Las Vegas where similar ordinances to restrict free speech in public areas were deemed unconstitutional.
Having said that, in the 1970's, I lived in Georgetown, Dupont Circle, 21st and M Streets, Mass Ave. and Alexandria. I worked at the Cellar Door at 34th and M Streets. It was venues like that and the crowds that it attracted, young and old, loud and quiet that helped make Georgetown what it is today. What has happened to common sense and a warning to tun it down.
The ordinance should be repealed and those responsible for it should be required to take an old fashion civics class. Maybe then they they will be reminded of the potection of individual rights (look up the meaning of the word republic, as in: "and to the Republic, for which it stands") that allowed for discourse (loud and quite), debate and the ballot that brought them to office.

By the way V .... there are already laws on the books that deal with drunk and disorderly conduct. Make a citizens arrest, call the police, but don't yell at a group of students walking home because one of them happens to be loud ... the police may (at their discretion) arrest you.

This law makes UNREASONABLY loud noise an arrestable offense. Apparently, to some posters, no amount of noise should be considered unreasonable. That notion is pure BS, and no matter how eloquently you think you've presented it, it still remains BS. Perhaps these people are perfectly happy living amidst an 'anything goes' atmosphere, but I seriously doubt they speak for 'the majority'. Also, to suggest that a law like this would lead to some type of apocalyptic society is just childish.

A big thank you to the many neighbors who contacted me over the weekend to express appreciation for my blogs. The efforts you made to show your support for my comments mean a lot to me. And we really loved the cupcakes! It's great to live in Georgetown and know that we are all working together to respect everyone and maintain a safe, vibrant, and caring community.

WHAT CONSTITUTES " UNREASONABLE " NOISE ?? TO A PERSON TRYING TO GO TO SLEEP DOES IT MEAN THE SAME TO A PERSON PLAYING A VIDEO GAME ?? IF THE COUNCIL, THAT UNSUFFERABLE CONGREGATION OF PERSONAGES , WHO THINK THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING THEY WOULD IMMEDIATELY REALIZE THAT THE TERM MUST BE ACCOMPANIED WITH AN ANALYTICALLY MEANINGFUL LEVEL INDBECIBELS OR SIMILAR MEASUREMENT. THAT MEANS TO MY WAY OF THINKING THAT THE STATUTE IS RIPE FOR APELLATE CONSIDERATION AS TO IT'S MEANING. I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE FIRST PERSONS OR GROUP SO CHARGED UNDER THIS STATUTE WILL NO DOUBT BE ABSOLVED OF ANY WRONGDOING BY SUCH A SITTING COURT AND TIME AND EFFORT , NOT TO MENTION MONEY BETTER USED IN OTHER PURSUITS WASTED