• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

A bit OT: Here's why there is a gun crime problem

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Apologies for slightly OT... I read this and my blood pressure went up.

We had a gang-related drive-by shooting a few nights ago after a group of thugs got kicked out of a night-time venue. A carload of said thugs drove by the front door and someone started shooting, killing one of the bouncers.

Three identified suspects, one caught right away, one turned himself in a couple days later, the last one, the alleged shooter, still on the run.

Of the one who turned himself in, we find this:

A second suspect, 25-year-old David Davion Burroughs of Stafford turned himself in at the Fredericksburg Police Department on Tuesday afternoon, city police spokeswoman Natatia Bledsoe said.

He was later turned over to Spotsylvania authorities and has been released on bond, [Spotsylvania Sheriff’s Captain Jeff] Pearce said. The Sheriff’s Office did not oppose Burroughs’ release on bond, he said.

“We are confident he was not the shooter,” Pearce said.

Pearce said Burroughs, a convicted felon, is charged with [1] transporting a firearm as a felon, [2] use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, [3] discharging a firearm at an occupied dwelling, [4] conspiracy to shoot at an occupied dwelling, [5] discharging a firearm from a vehicle and [6] conspiracy to discharge a firearm from a vehicle.

Charged with SIX major crimes and the Sheriff's Office "did not oppose" his release.

The gun-grabbers want YOUR guns instead.

UNbelievable.

TFred
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Can we please remember that bail is supposed to be surety for the accused to return to the court in order to stand trial. If the accused meets the criteria set by either a magistrate, as it appears in this case, or a judge, for assurance that the accused will stand trial, bail is either not needed or merely needs to be enough to reinforce the necessity of showing up. That the accused turned himself in suggests a willingness to also show up for trial.

Had the accused been determined to present a danger of either refusing to cease his ilegal behavior, or to commit other illegal acts, the magistrate/judge have the option of withholding bail. They seemed tro feel it was unnecessary.

I am rather surprised that they did not throw second degree murder at him as well, seeing as how the felony murder rule still applies in Virginia. Historically, persons accused of murder are not released pending trial, based on the presumption that if they were willing to commit the worst of crimes there was nothing that would stop them from either committing it again or committing a lesser crime (in for a penny, in for a pound).

And as for the six felonies charged, what little fact has been reported may suport that he was but an accessory in the second degree, or worse yet an "innocent bystander" trapped in the car as the other two drove by and committed the crimes.

stay safe.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Can we please remember that bail is supposed to be surety for the accused to return to the court in order to stand trial. If the accused meets the criteria set by either a magistrate, as it appears in this case, or a judge, for assurance that the accused will stand trial, bail is either not needed or merely needs to be enough to reinforce the necessity of showing up. That the accused turned himself in suggests a willingness to also show up for trial.

Had the accused been determined to present a danger of either refusing to cease his ilegal behavior, or to commit other illegal acts, the magistrate/judge have the option of withholding bail. They seemed tro feel it was unnecessary.

I am rather surprised that they did not throw second degree murder at him as well, seeing as how the felony murder rule still applies in Virginia. Historically, persons accused of murder are not released pending trial, based on the presumption that if they were willing to commit the worst of crimes there was nothing that would stop them from either committing it again or committing a lesser crime (in for a penny, in for a pound).

And as for the six felonies charged, what little fact has been reported may suport that he was but an accessory in the second degree, or worse yet an "innocent bystander" trapped in the car as the other two drove by and committed the crimes.

stay safe.
Sure. You're a smart guy. Most of us here are fairly smart folks.

What does this tell buddy-thugs on the street?

TFred
 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
Sure. You're a smart guy. Most of us here are fairly smart folks.

What does this tell buddy-thugs on the street?

TFred

Probably that he doesn't have long to live. My guess is he would have been better off in jail.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Sure. You're a smart guy. Most of us here are fairly smart folks.

What does this tell buddy-thugs on the street?

TFred

Are you seriously suggesting that his buddy-thugs are going to be positively influenced to commit more/worse crimes because he was released instead of languishing in jail?

Isn't that just the other side of the death-penalty-deters people-from-committing-murder argument?

My study of the literature, combined with my experience with the population, suggests they are not as analytical as you seem to give them credit for being.

Unlike "us" - who seem to see penalties such as death or long-term (anything over 1 hour) incarceration as threatening. If you want penalties for crimes to have a deterrent effect on those who have not yet committed a crime, quit letting lawyers and businessmen set the penalties. Let the criminals tell you what would make them stop and think the penalty is too great, and then fix that as the sentence. (If you don't want to mix with criminals, as a kindergarten class what they think the penalties should be for violating a classroom rule. ::shudder::)

stay safe.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
"Gun crime" is an anti-gunner term...

...just like common-sense gun control laws.

Gun crime is an arbitrary, false distinction made by anti-gunners to sneakily mislead listeners and readers by setting a false premise that violent crime committed with a gun is somehow different from violent crime committed with a knife or bludgeon.

The only time we should be using the term gun crime is when we turn the anti-gunner's argument against them, demanding they also fight for an end to gun crime committed by government on disarmed or unarmed population or people. For example, demanding anti-gunners also argue for an end to the type of gun crime perpetrated by CA cops on people driving the wrong truck during the manhunt for the former cop-turned-cop killer. Or, an end to the gun crime perpertrated by SWAT when they raid the wrong home on a drug warrant. Or, an end to the gun crime perpetrated by Stalin on his own people, or the Maoist Cultural Revolution, or the Khymer Rouge.

Otherwise, don't let the anti-gunners define the argument by setting the terminology, or help the anti-gunners by using the terminology.
 
Last edited:
Top