The U.S. Attorney's hidden role in undermining DC's gun laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

[Anonymous]

Whatever happened to 0 tolerance, handguns outlawed in DC? Bring it back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

Exactly. Really tired of both the left and right ignoring half of the equation.

[Anonymous]

Here's my proposal:

Fund a program where police give out $100 vouchers to the public. This compensates for the inconvenience of a search, while allowing searches to unconver illegal possession. The better an officers instincts are, the larger the voucher can be, since they'll rarely be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

What is "point of use" control?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

What is "point of use" control?

The 2A pro-gun faction slander it as "stop and frisk."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

What is "point of use" control?

The 2A pro-gun faction slander it as "stop and frisk."

Stop and frisk would have zero success with the current DC Court of Appeals' interpretation of the 4th amendment. We can't even prosecute illegal gun possession as it is given the current precedent and you think stop and frisk would help?

USAO could take some of the DC Court of Appeal's rejected search cases that led to dropped gun charges to the US Supreme court to appeal the decisions.

However, could understand that would be quite risky given the current US Supreme Court leaning on 2a. Conservatives who are paranoid about someone coming to "take their guns away" will then also lean toward ensuring the grounds for search are very strict....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

What is "point of use" control?

The 2A pro-gun faction slander it as "stop and frisk."

Stop and frisk would have zero success with the current DC Court of Appeals' interpretation of the 4th amendment. We can't even prosecute illegal gun possession as it is given the current precedent and you think stop and frisk would help?

USAO could take some of the DC Court of Appeal's rejected search cases that led to dropped gun charges to the US Supreme court to appeal the decisions.

However, could understand that would be quite risky given the current US Supreme Court leaning on 2a. Conservatives who are paranoid about someone coming to "take their guns away" will then also lean toward ensuring the grounds for search are very strict....

Judge Deahl on the DC Court of Appeals is a Trump appointee. Making it difficult to prosecute gun crimes is a priority for both the right and the left.

[Anonymous]

Just part of the larger strategy that folks can’t vote from jail, which in the case of DC makes no sense given how one sided the electorate is.

Hence 2024 will be a repeat of 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the guns are coming out of VA...?

Most are which is why we should focus on gun control to keep them off the streets instead of divisive things like this topic that we have no control over.

You don't really GAF about gun control if you dismiss prosecuting criminals for having illegal guns as "divisive things."

You just want to stick it to legal gun owners because you're mad about urban crime and don't want to confront it.

NP but both trafficking guns into DC (typically straw purchases from easier to purchase states) AND prosecuting criminals locally are problems.

It's well established by gun tracing research that most guns used in urban crime in blue cities come from lax gun law states.

It's also clear that in DC particularly, gun prosecution is way too lax.

We should focus on both. I believe in 2024 that we can focus on addressing both types of criminals in both locations rather than picking and choosing only this criminal and that criminal. We can focus on both A + B.

Picking only A or only B means hypocrisy on both sides of the equation and political spectrum.

Point-of-sale gun control and point-of-use gun control (followed by prosecution).

What is "point of use" control?

The 2A pro-gun faction slander it as "stop and frisk."

Stop and frisk would have zero success with the current DC Court of Appeals' interpretation of the 4th amendment. We can't even prosecute illegal gun possession as it is given the current precedent and you think stop and frisk would help?

Bingo

[Anonymous]

USAO tried to ensure this guy who was captured on video emptying his AR-15 in public in broad daylight was held.

PDS alum magistrate judge said no.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/crime-gun-violence-district-of-columbia-us-attoneys-office-matthew-graves-ar15-rifle/65-201db8a1-2870-4ff9-9ffc-58c269225d51

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:USAO tried to ensure this guy who was captured on video emptying his AR-15 in public in broad daylight was held.

PDS alum magistrate judge said no.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/crime-gun-violence-district-of-columbia-us-attoneys-office-matthew-graves-ar15-rifle/65-201db8a1-2870-4ff9-9ffc-58c269225d51

Wow, the judge wanted to "give him a chance" to not shoot up his neighborhood with an AR15

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The crime surge we experienced last year was based on a deliberate choice to give up on prosecuting gun crimes. I have no idea why, this path was chosen, but it did not have to be that way.

Racial equity.

Do you think your funny by posting this? This is like a bad joke my uncle was making in 2020

That’s because the phrase, along with BLM and DEI, is so 2020. Most of America has moved on.