Shooting at or near Burke HS?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Was the injured 12-year old a student at Burke? And why isn’t the media calling this a school shooting?? It seems like the news reports just call it a shooting on a specific block, but the shooter was clearly targeting a school (and even updated the school wiki page before he killed himself). |
Anonymous
I agree that is exactly what this was. However, there is an element of suicide by cop. I am horrified there were any victims if he was simply looking for a way out, but to me it seems like that was underlying given his arsenal. So disturbing. All specific details of how EB responded in this emergency situation should be taken down immediately BTW. |
Anonymous
|
Have not read entire thread and don’t know all the details, but it seems like police handled situation well.
Good job. |
Anonymous
Anonymous
As of right now MPD has not officially identified the dead individual in the apartment, but at the same time they also say they are no longer looking for the “person of interest” in the photo. So you can draw your own conclusions from that. |
Anonymous
|
I am going to say it, but this sounds like suicide by cop and a mental health issue more than a gun issue. The fact that he fired as many rounds as he did in the manner that he did (if you have seen the video, you know what I am talking about). His victims were almost incidental to his getting attention. And then posting the taunting messages to the police after the shooting but not turning this into a situation where more people were killed.
It looks like suicide by cop by a mentally disturbed individual. Oh and great job by the authorities by the way. We are quick to jump on them, but they seemed to do great yesterday afternoon. And finally, great job by the EB staff and students. What an evening. Best wishes to all of the victims for speedy recoveries and to the students for their quick mental recoveries and potential return to school. |
Anonymous
I didn't even read his message as taunting , but I'm not sure what the acronym was. It sounded like he was saying please come get me. When we will address mental health in this country? Integrative health? Between addiction and mental illness, how many need to die? |
Anonymous
| This is clearly BOTH a gun issue and a mental health issue. |
Anonymous
Sure..and I will be curious to see if he had any mental health history that should have been flagged in buying the arsenal, like Cho in VA Tech. |
Anonymous
Thanks for clarifying this. I dug in and the DC AG Racine opposes USAO handling gun crimes for both home rule arguments and that federal law contravenes Racine's reform approach. Probably another discussion for another thread, but it appears that Racine and Allen are quite aligned in their viewpoints. And yes, if the USAO is prosecuting gun charges they need to work closely with the city and the police gathering evidence and not plead them down as much as they have been. Not sure, given the below, that would be Racine's 'take'. According to the below, he has even filed to urge dismissal of two felon-in-possession cases by the USAO based on his judicial reform viewpoint. https://oag.dc.gov/release/ag-racine-opposes-usao-prosecution-local-gun-cases "AG Racine Opposes USAO Prosecution Of Local Gun Cases In Federal Court April 22, 2020 OAG Argues USAO Policy Undermines Home Rule Authority, Denies Residents Benefits of D.C.’s Data-Driven Public Safety and Sentencing Reforms; Harsher Federal Sentencing Guidelines Disproportionately Harm African Americans and Youth WASHINGTON, D.C. – Attorney General Karl A. Racine today announced that his office filed two friend-of-the-court briefs opposing a policy from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia (USAO) to prosecute felon-in-possession (FIP) gun cases in federal court. The amicus briefs argue that the policy undermines home rule authority by taking local cases that have historically been tried in Superior Court and prosecuting them in federal court under much harsher sentencing guidelines and without protections enacted by the Council of the District of Columbia to prevent overincarceration. The briefs further argue that this policy will disproportionately harm African Americans in the District, who are more likely than any other demographic to have a prior felony conviction. For these reasons, the amicus briefs urge the dismissal of two FIP cases brought against defendants in federal court (U.S. v. Reed and U.S. v. Simmons). “The District has enacted data-driven criminal justice reforms that hold offenders accountable and address problems of overincarceration and racial inequities,” said AG Racine. “The U.S. Attorney’s policy to prosecute local gun crimes in federal court intentionally sidesteps our local courts, thus denying offenders the benefits of these reforms, and reverts to a failed federal tough-on-crime approach. The District has strong laws to punish felons in possession of a gun and must be allowed to enforce them without interference.” The District of Columbia has a higher per capita rate of incarceration than any U.S. state: 1,153 of every 100,000 people in the District are incarcerated, as compared with the national average of 698 per 100,000 people. In FY 2015, over 90 percent of individuals returning to the District from the D.C. Department of Corrections and federal prison were African American, and a significant proportion were under the age of 30. Concerned about overincarceration and racial inequities, the Council has enacted several criminal justice reforms to remedy these problems. These local laws apply only to defendants tried and sentenced in the Superior Court. Before USAO’s FIP policy, most individuals charged with possession of a gun as a convicted felon were tried and sentenced in Superior Court under local law. On February 6, 2019, former U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu announced a new policy requiring all FIP cases to be prosecuted under federal law. In the briefs, OAG argues that USAO’s FIP policy harms the District and its residents by: Undermining home rule in the District: Congress created a local court system for the District to try local criminal offenses and granted the Council the authority to enact local criminal laws. The Council has carried out that authority by enacting strict gun laws, which are sufficiently strong to punish felons in possession in the District. By prosecuting FIP cases in federal court, the USAO ignores the will of local policymakers and undermines the District’s interest in governing itself. Disproportionately harming African Americans: The District has an interest in ensuring that the criminal law is applied equally to all District residents. African Americans in the District are significantly more likely to have a prior felony conviction. Application of the FIP policy will thus lead to much higher sentences for African Americans. Examples from other jurisdictions where similar policies have been implemented confirm that the policy will disproportionately affect African Americans. Denying young offenders access to sentencing reforms: The District has made significant efforts to reduce incarceration of its residents, in part by providing for sentencing alternatives and the opportunity for sentence reduction for individuals who commit their crimes as young adults. For eligible defendants, Superior Court judges can issue a prison sentence below what would otherwise be a mandatory minimum term, implement a sentence of probation, or grant other sentence reductions. None of these opportunities will be available to defendants tried in federal court under the FIP policy. Studies have demonstrated that longer prison sentences do not reduce crime rates, have limited effects on deterrence and recidivism, and have diminishing returns for public safety as individuals ‘age out’ of the high-crime years. Straining the limited resources of the federal district court on local matters: The USAO has stated that it is prepared to bring as many as 400 FIP cases a year in federal court. By bringing cases previously brought in Superior Court to federal court, the FIP Policy will divert judicial time and resources from both its growing civil docket and from criminal cases implicating greater federal concerns. This obstructs the ability of all litigants to have their claims heard in a timely manner. A copy of the amicus brief in U.S. v. Reed: https://oag.dc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/FIP-Amicus-US-v-Reed.pdf A copy of the amicus brief in U.S. v. Simmons: https://oag.dc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/FIP-Amicus-US-v-Simmons.pdf OAG’s Work on Criminal Justice Reform OAG continues to advocate for and implement criminal justice reforms that both hold offenders accountable and enhance public safety through rehabilitation. Last year, AG Racine co-authored a Washington Post op-ed with Councilmember Charles Allen supporting the Second Look Amendment Act, a bill currently before the Council that would expand eligibility for sentence reduction to defendants who committed their offenses before the age of 25. If enacted, this legislation would only apply to convictions handed down by the Superior Court. OAG also works to narrow the entryway to the criminal justice system through data-driven initiatives such as Restorative Justice and the Alternatives to Court Experience (ACE) Diversion program. Restorative justice uses mediation to empower victims to express how they were affected by crime and require offenders to accept responsibility and work to repair the harm they caused. OAG was the first prosecutor’s office in the nation to establish a restorative justice program in-house. A preliminary data analysis conducted by OAG found that 57 percent of youth who participated in a restorative justice conference did not recidivate, whereas just 42 percent of similar youth who were prosecuted did not recidivate. This represents a 15-percentage point improvement in keeping youth out of the justice system. ACE Diversion, an alternative to traditional prosecution, offers wrap-around services like mental health treatment, mentoring, and individual and family therapy to young, nonviolent offenders. Nearly 75% of those who have completed the ACE program have not been re-arrested. |
Anonymous
The mental health issue is even worse than it was. Even if you have all the money in the world and agree to seek help, there just aren’t enough providers. |
Anonymous
How will a gun shop get medical records? |
Anonymous
| Anyone know what the motive was? It sounds like he streamed it on 4chan so I imagine there’s a trail of social media posts about what he was trying to do |
Anonymous
Suicide by cop occurs when the sole intent of the individual is to die by suicide. This person clearly had murderous intent and wanted to take out some kids first. Violence and guns are the issue here. No 45 minute session with a therapist mhmm-ing is going to solve it. |
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
I am not sure why you have chosen this hill to die on rather than to just accept that you were wrong to jump on the AG and a Council member when jurisdiction for this shooting (which now doesn't need to be prosecuted in any case) lies with the USAO. I really hate when posters act as you are and endlessly muddy the waters with irrelevant information rather than just moving on. Here is what you apparently missed: 1) regardless of the AG's preferences for future authority, currently jurisdiction for felony gun crimes by adults lies with the USAO. Therefore, you had no reason to attack the AG and a CM. 2) the press statement by the AG referenced felon-in-possession cases, not shootings. So, your entire post was irrelevant to yesterday's violence. Given that we currently have no information that the shooter was a felon and that he committed crimes far and beyond such a violation, you may have well as been discussing Racine's attitude toward jaywalking. If you are concerned about the prosecution of gun crimes by adults in DC, you need to direct your attention to the USAO. You were wrong to immediately jump on the AG and a CM. You apparently have a difficult time with having been wrong, but it's time for you to move on. |