Springfield, VA teen shot and killed two other teens in broad daylight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burkard wasn’t in the fight - that’s why there’s no marks on him. His friend was fighting at Burkard’s house and he was the host. He went and shot the two others in cold-blood. That’s murder not manslaughter. He’s going away for life.

A friend of Zachary Burkard, 18, of Springfield, sent the invite, the prosecutor said. When four males arrived at the home Sunday afternoon, a fistfight broke out between Burkard’s friend and one of the teenage victims in an upstairs room, the prosecutor said.

Burkard went upstairs and opened fire, hitting two of the four males who came to the home on Winding Way Court

LOL. That's an OP Ed piece, not journalism. An "invite"? Did the friend use that word? Highly unlikely, which means it's the WP writer trying to paint their own picture of what happened.

Here are the facts. People were in his home causing grievous bodily injury to his friend. He shot those committing said injuries.

He will walk.

Since when are you allowed to shoot people to death during a fistfight when you are not even the one being punched?

It is entirely legal to use deadly force to prevent potentially lethal injury to another person within your own home.

More people die from fists every year than from AR15’s. Google the FBI UCR stats if you doubt me.

Correct.

The idiotic PP you are answering thinks you need to stand by and watch your daughter get raped while yelling "Please stop!"

I don't know the details of the case, but good luck with that defense! It is highly unlikely that you will be killed in a fist fight. It sounds like somebody is a coward and clearly doesn't know how to fight.

I can almost absolutely, 99.9% guarantee that if you and I (hypothetically speaking, of course) were in a no-rules “fist fight” (whatever that is?), that you wouldn’t survive it. I’ve studied and competed in various MMA disciplines since I was 19. You would have zero chance against someone with a skillset even below mine. And you’d spend the last 30 seconds of your life wishing you had a gun. Because that would be the only thing (other than me exercising some restraint) capable of saving you from someone like me, if we were in a real-world fight with each other. To paraphrase Mike Tyson- “everyone has a plan, until they get kicked in the carotid sinus baroreceptor”.

Looks like the keyboard warrior got a little butt hurt. Nobody cares about the little games you play in the dojo. We are talking about the legal ramifications of bringing a gun to a fist fight. That is going to be a tough one to justify.

I’m not butthurt at all. I’m just trying to explain to you that there is no functional difference between a “fist fight” (your word, not mine) and using a gun. Because you can’t seem to wrap your head around the reality that getting into a fist fight with someone could very likely leave you just as dead as if they’d pulled a gun and shot you. A punch or kick from someone with training is absolutely as lethal as a bullet. Frankly, I’m not sure why seem to have such difficulty understanding this.

Oh, and it’s not a Dojo. Dojo’s are for eastern disciplines. You’ve been watching too many seasons of Karate Kid. Step away from the NetFlix.

+1

The second fist fight started being being discussed all I could think of was that Senate records dude who was drunk and running his mouth at The Scarlett Oak. Dude talked shit to the wrong guy and got knocked out, hitting his head on the curb as he went down. Dead.

My best friend from childhood was the bartender at some JMU bar in Harrisonburg the nigh a fight broke out. One guy gets knocked out and falls on a broken bottle on the floor of the bar. Bottle cut his neck open and he bled out before EMTs arrived. Bar was shut for a good while.

Ok fine, I’ll concede that it’s possible for someone to die from a fistfight. But dying from a gunshot is far, far worse than dying from a punch.

Did I just blow your mind?!?!

You really are an idiot. We weren't debating which is 'worse'. We were debating whether fist fights can be fatal and thus warrant use of deadly force.

Then let’s debate why he didn’t use some other option that wasn’t lethal instead. He could’ve sprayed them with bug spray or mace. Or thrown a bedsheet or even a net over them. There are lots of options other than using a gun.

Did I just blow your mind?!?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burkard wasn’t in the fight - that’s why there’s no marks on him. His friend was fighting at Burkard’s house and he was the host. He went and shot the two others in cold-blood. That’s murder not manslaughter. He’s going away for life.

A friend of Zachary Burkard, 18, of Springfield, sent the invite, the prosecutor said. When four males arrived at the home Sunday afternoon, a fistfight broke out between Burkard’s friend and one of the teenage victims in an upstairs room, the prosecutor said.

Burkard went upstairs and opened fire, hitting two of the four males who came to the home on Winding Way Court

LOL. That's an OP Ed piece, not journalism. An "invite"? Did the friend use that word? Highly unlikely, which means it's the WP writer trying to paint their own picture of what happened.

Here are the facts. People were in his home causing grievous bodily injury to his friend. He shot those committing said injuries.

He will walk.

Since when are you allowed to shoot people to death during a fistfight when you are not even the one being punched?

It is entirely legal to use deadly force to prevent potentially lethal injury to another person within your own home.

More people die from fists every year than from AR15’s. Google the FBI UCR stats if you doubt me.

Correct.

The idiotic PP you are answering thinks you need to stand by and watch your daughter get raped while yelling "Please stop!"

I don't know the details of the case, but good luck with that defense! It is highly unlikely that you will be killed in a fist fight. It sounds like somebody is a coward and clearly doesn't know how to fight.

I can almost absolutely, 99.9% guarantee that if you and I (hypothetically speaking, of course) were in a no-rules “fist fight” (whatever that is?), that you wouldn’t survive it. I’ve studied and competed in various MMA disciplines since I was 19. You would have zero chance against someone with a skillset even below mine. And you’d spend the last 30 seconds of your life wishing you had a gun. Because that would be the only thing (other than me exercising some restraint) capable of saving you from someone like me, if we were in a real-world fight with each other. To paraphrase Mike Tyson- “everyone has a plan, until they get kicked in the carotid sinus baroreceptor”.

Looks like the keyboard warrior got a little butt hurt. Nobody cares about the little games you play in the dojo. We are talking about the legal ramifications of bringing a gun to a fist fight. That is going to be a tough one to justify.

I’m not butthurt at all. I’m just trying to explain to you that there is no functional difference between a “fist fight” (your word, not mine) and using a gun. Because you can’t seem to wrap your head around the reality that getting into a fist fight with someone could very likely leave you just as dead as if they’d pulled a gun and shot you. A punch or kick from someone with training is absolutely as lethal as a bullet. Frankly, I’m not sure why seem to have such difficulty understanding this.

Oh, and it’s not a Dojo. Dojo’s are for eastern disciplines. You’ve been watching too many seasons of Karate Kid. Step away from the NetFlix.

So then you believe everyone who gets in a fist fight should be charged with attempted murder just like anyone involved in a shoot out that missed would?

[Anonymous]

I’m Surprised there hasn’t been more attention given to fact that the kid owned two ghost guns and a shotgun. Another interesting thing is that apparently he had a “trauma background,” whatever that means and is being evaluated by mental health staff. I would like to know more about how easy it is to buy or make ghost guns these days.

“Nemitz said the shooting was carried out with a “ghost gun,” a gun that is cobbled together from parts purchased on the Internet and elsewhere. Such guns have no serial numbers to trace, and users don’t have to go through a background check before purchasing the parts.

Ghost guns have been used in an increasing number of crimes in recent years. Nemitz said Fairfax County police recovered a second ghost gun and a shotgun that belonged to Burkard in searches of the home where the shooting occurred and of Burkard’s home.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/burkard-bond-hearing-fairfax/2021/04/28/076f0f4a-a840-11eb-8d25-7b30e74923ea_story.html%3foutputType=amp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m Surprised there hasn’t been more attention given to fact that the kid owned two ghost guns and a shotgun. Another interesting thing is that apparently he had a “trauma background,” whatever that means and is being evaluated by mental health staff. I would like to know more about how easy it is to buy or make ghost guns these days.

“Nemitz said the shooting was carried out with a “ghost gun,” a gun that is cobbled together from parts purchased on the Internet and elsewhere. Such guns have no serial numbers to trace, and users don’t have to go through a background check before purchasing the parts.

Ghost guns have been used in an increasing number of crimes in recent years. Nemitz said Fairfax County police recovered a second ghost gun and a shotgun that belonged to Burkard in searches of the home where the shooting occurred and of Burkard’s home.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/burkard-bond-hearing-fairfax/2021/04/28/076f0f4a-a840-11eb-8d25-7b30e74923ea_story.html%3foutputType=amp

Thank you PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burkard wasn’t in the fight - that’s why there’s no marks on him. His friend was fighting at Burkard’s house and he was the host. He went and shot the two others in cold-blood. That’s murder not manslaughter. He’s going away for life.

A friend of Zachary Burkard, 18, of Springfield, sent the invite, the prosecutor said. When four males arrived at the home Sunday afternoon, a fistfight broke out between Burkard’s friend and one of the teenage victims in an upstairs room, the prosecutor said.

Burkard went upstairs and opened fire, hitting two of the four males who came to the home on Winding Way Court

LOL. That's an OP Ed piece, not journalism. An "invite"? Did the friend use that word? Highly unlikely, which means it's the WP writer trying to paint their own picture of what happened.

Here are the facts. People were in his home causing grievous bodily injury to his friend. He shot those committing said injuries.

He will walk.

Since when are you allowed to shoot people to death during a fistfight when you are not even the one being punched?

It is entirely legal to use deadly force to prevent potentially lethal injury to another person within your own home.

More people die from fists every year than from AR15’s. Google the FBI UCR stats if you doubt me.

Correct.

The idiotic PP you are answering thinks you need to stand by and watch your daughter get raped while yelling "Please stop!"

I don't know the details of the case, but good luck with that defense! It is highly unlikely that you will be killed in a fist fight. It sounds like somebody is a coward and clearly doesn't know how to fight.

I can almost absolutely, 99.9% guarantee that if you and I (hypothetically speaking, of course) were in a no-rules “fist fight” (whatever that is?), that you wouldn’t survive it. I’ve studied and competed in various MMA disciplines since I was 19. You would have zero chance against someone with a skillset even below mine. And you’d spend the last 30 seconds of your life wishing you had a gun. Because that would be the only thing (other than me exercising some restraint) capable of saving you from someone like me, if we were in a real-world fight with each other. To paraphrase Mike Tyson- “everyone has a plan, until they get kicked in the carotid sinus baroreceptor”.

Looks like the keyboard warrior got a little butt hurt. Nobody cares about the little games you play in the dojo. We are talking about the legal ramifications of bringing a gun to a fist fight. That is going to be a tough one to justify.

I’m not butthurt at all. I’m just trying to explain to you that there is no functional difference between a “fist fight” (your word, not mine) and using a gun. Because you can’t seem to wrap your head around the reality that getting into a fist fight with someone could very likely leave you just as dead as if they’d pulled a gun and shot you. A punch or kick from someone with training is absolutely as lethal as a bullet. Frankly, I’m not sure why seem to have such difficulty understanding this.

Oh, and it’s not a Dojo. Dojo’s are for eastern disciplines. You’ve been watching too many seasons of Karate Kid. Step away from the NetFlix.

So then you believe everyone who gets in a fist fight should be charged with attempted murder just like anyone involved in a shoot out that missed would?

Yes. I would be totally fine with that.

People think there are no consequences for starting a physical confrontation with a stranger. They should all be charged with attempted murder, absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

Spare us your NRA talking-points about “hunting rifles”. A phrase coined by the gun lobby to mask what a rifle that fires a ultra-high-powered aided by telescopic aiming devices for pinpoint accuracy up to half a mile away really is. They’re sniper rifles. Not hunting rifles.

The term “hunting rifle” was created to make these guns seem innocuous and non-threatening. But the reality - the truth that they’re covering up - is that they’re by far THE deadliest types of guns available in terms of power, range and accuracy. They fire a bullet which can be 3-7 times MORE powerful than the bullet from an AR-16. They have telescopes which enable the shooter to see targets (otherwise known as “victims”) from over 1,000 yards away, and the gun is capable of hitting and instantly killing a person from nearly a mile away in most cases, and even farther with some of the most powerful bullets available.

Can they be used to hunt deers? Of course they can. But that doesn’t change their actual intended design - for shooting humans at extreme distances.

And most people are duped into not knowing what they really are when liars like you call them “hunting rifles”. Take your NRA lies someplace else.

They’re not hunting rifles. They’re sniper rifles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

Spare us your NRA talking-points about “hunting rifles”. A phrase coined by the gun lobby to mask what a rifle that fires a ultra-high-powered aided by telescopic aiming devices for pinpoint accuracy up to half a mile away really is. They’re sniper rifles. Not hunting rifles.

The term “hunting rifle” was created to make these guns seem innocuous and non-threatening. But the reality - the truth that they’re covering up - is that they’re by far THE deadliest types of guns available in terms of power, range and accuracy. They fire a bullet which can be 3-7 times MORE powerful than the bullet from an AR-16. They have telescopes which enable the shooter to see targets (otherwise known as “victims”) from over 1,000 yards away, and the gun is capable of hitting and instantly killing a person from nearly a mile away in most cases, and even farther with some of the most powerful bullets available.

Can they be used to hunt deers? Of course they can. But that doesn’t change their actual intended design - for shooting humans at extreme distances.

And most people are duped into not knowing what they really are when liars like you call them “hunting rifles”. Take your NRA lies someplace else.

They’re not hunting rifles. They’re sniper rifles.

It's obvious that you know nothing about firearms

Telescopes...LMFAO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

Spare us your NRA talking-points about “hunting rifles”. A phrase coined by the gun lobby to mask what a rifle that fires a ultra-high-powered aided by telescopic aiming devices for pinpoint accuracy up to half a mile away really is. They’re sniper rifles. Not hunting rifles.

The term “hunting rifle” was created to make these guns seem innocuous and non-threatening. But the reality - the truth that they’re covering up - is that they’re by far THE deadliest types of guns available in terms of power, range and accuracy. They fire a bullet which can be 3-7 times MORE powerful than the bullet from an AR-16. They have telescopes which enable the shooter to see targets (otherwise known as “victims”) from over 1,000 yards away, and the gun is capable of hitting and instantly killing a person from nearly a mile away in most cases, and even farther with some of the most powerful bullets available.

Can they be used to hunt deers? Of course they can. But that doesn’t change their actual intended design - for shooting humans at extreme distances.

And most people are duped into not knowing what they really are when liars like you call them “hunting rifles”. Take your NRA lies someplace else.

They’re not hunting rifles. They’re sniper rifles.

It's obvious that you know nothing about firearms

Telescopes...LMFAO

Since I’m not a baby-dick’d ammosexual like you I never cared to learn anything about guns. I have far more important things to occupy myself with. But I know enough about them to be able to spot your lies and euphemisms like “hunting rifles”. Only cowards who don’t know how to handle themselves need a gun. I’m no coward. I can defend myself without a gun because I’m a real man. You’re just a scared little beyotch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch he’s going to get charged as an adult - just graduating high school this year. No easy ‘juvenile’ offense laws in VA.

Once you’re 18 it doesn’t matter what the ‘juvenile’ offense laws are.

He shot and killed two people. And he’s 18. Why wouldn’t he changed as an adult? Would you say that if he were black?

Would there be a DCUM thread if he and the victims were black?

Absolutely yes, if it were in a white neighborhood. This thread would already be 40 pages.

If it were black or Hispanic kids in a black or Hispanic neighborhood?

Absolutely. I guess you deliberately missed the threads about the uber driver and the two teen girls murdered in D.C.? It was huge.

That took place in Navy Yard. PP said a Black or Hispanic neighborhood. POC have been murdered all over DC in minority neighborhoods and there's no "huge" deal being made. Literally 8 shootings (or people shot? Can't remember) yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch he’s going to get charged as an adult - just graduating high school this year. No easy ‘juvenile’ offense laws in VA.

Once you’re 18 it doesn’t matter what the ‘juvenile’ offense laws are.

He shot and killed two people. And he’s 18. Why wouldn’t he changed as an adult? Would you say that if he were black?

Would there be a DCUM thread if he and the victims were black?

Absolutely yes, if it were in a white neighborhood. This thread would already be 40 pages.

If it were black or Hispanic kids in a black or Hispanic neighborhood?

Absolutely. I guess you deliberately missed the threads about the uber driver and the two teen girls murdered in D.C.? It was huge.

That took place in Navy Yard. PP said a Black or Hispanic neighborhood. POC have been murdered all over DC in minority neighborhoods and there's no "huge" deal being made. Literally 8 shootings (or people shot? Can't remember) yesterday.

What are you prattling on about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

Spare us your NRA talking-points about “hunting rifles”. A phrase coined by the gun lobby to mask what a rifle that fires a ultra-high-powered aided by telescopic aiming devices for pinpoint accuracy up to half a mile away really is. They’re sniper rifles. Not hunting rifles.

The term “hunting rifle” was created to make these guns seem innocuous and non-threatening. But the reality - the truth that they’re covering up - is that they’re by far THE deadliest types of guns available in terms of power, range and accuracy. They fire a bullet which can be 3-7 times MORE powerful than the bullet from an AR-16. They have telescopes which enable the shooter to see targets (otherwise known as “victims”) from over 1,000 yards away, and the gun is capable of hitting and instantly killing a person from nearly a mile away in most cases, and even farther with some of the most powerful bullets available.

Can they be used to hunt deers? Of course they can. But that doesn’t change their actual intended design - for shooting humans at extreme distances.

And most people are duped into not knowing what they really are when liars like you call them “hunting rifles”. Take your NRA lies someplace else.

They’re not hunting rifles. They’re sniper rifles.

It's obvious that you know nothing about firearms

Telescopes...LMFAO

Since I’m not a baby-dick’d ammosexual like you I never cared to learn anything about guns. I have far more important things to occupy myself with. But I know enough about them to be able to spot your lies and euphemisms like “hunting rifles”. Only cowards who don’t know how to handle themselves need a gun. I’m no coward. I can defend myself without a gun because I’m a real man. You’re just a scared little beyotch.

You and your bare hands can defend yourself against bad guys with guns? You must really be a BEAST!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m Surprised there hasn’t been more attention given to fact that the kid owned two ghost guns and a shotgun. Another interesting thing is that apparently he had a “trauma background,” whatever that means and is being evaluated by mental health staff. I would like to know more about how easy it is to buy or make ghost guns these days.

“Nemitz said the shooting was carried out with a “ghost gun,” a gun that is cobbled together from parts purchased on the Internet and elsewhere. Such guns have no serial numbers to trace, and users don’t have to go through a background check before purchasing the parts.

Ghost guns have been used in an increasing number of crimes in recent years. Nemitz said Fairfax County police recovered a second ghost gun and a shotgun that belonged to Burkard in searches of the home where the shooting occurred and of Burkard’s home.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/burkard-bond-hearing-fairfax/2021/04/28/076f0f4a-a840-11eb-8d25-7b30e74923ea_story.html%3foutputType=amp

I am honestly getting to the point of just thinking that it would be a lot easier for the government to control and ban the dissemination of gun powder (like ammonium nitrate now). No constitutional problems and with controlled supply chains reducing the number of bullets in circulation it would make it a lot harder to shoot people when you don't have ammo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch he’s going to get charged as an adult - just graduating high school this year. No easy ‘juvenile’ offense laws in VA.

Once you’re 18 it doesn’t matter what the ‘juvenile’ offense laws are.

He shot and killed two people. And he’s 18. Why wouldn’t he changed as an adult? Would you say that if he were black?

Would there be a DCUM thread if he and the victims were black?

Absolutely yes, if it were in a white neighborhood. This thread would already be 40 pages.

If it were black or Hispanic kids in a black or Hispanic neighborhood?

Absolutely. I guess you deliberately missed the threads about the uber driver and the two teen girls murdered in D.C.? It was huge.

That took place in Navy Yard. PP said a Black or Hispanic neighborhood. POC have been murdered all over DC in minority neighborhoods and there's no "huge" deal being made. Literally 8 shootings (or people shot? Can't remember) yesterday.

What are you prattling on about?

What, are you not able to follow a conversation? As usual, DCUM is bringing race into the issue and I responded to that comment. I was simultaneously trying to bring attention to the massive violence occuring in the District that is being mostly ignored by media. I'm sorry 8 shootings in one city in one day is "prattling" to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get rid of the guns!!!!!

Guns are like abortion.

Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one.

But you don’t get to tell other people they can’t have one either, m’kay?

Your abortion can’t kill me or my family.

How can any of my guns kill you? Do you think they’re sentient beings capable of leaving the house on their own accord and doing whatever they please?

Then what do you need them for? To protect yourself from what? Don't you think maybe a ring camera or a home security system might be a little less aggressive and more practicall? A family member isn't going to shoot themselves in the head with a camera or a doorbell.

You honestly don't know why someone would carry a gun? Maybe you live in gated community full of privileged people? Maybe you don't have someone stalking you? There are many other reasons.

In other words, you have a gun because you intend to shoot someone with it. Anyone who owns a loaded gun, other than a hunting rifle, who then uses it against a person should have intent to kill presumed as a matter of law.

Spare us your NRA talking-points about “hunting rifles”. A phrase coined by the gun lobby to mask what a rifle that fires a ultra-high-powered aided by telescopic aiming devices for pinpoint accuracy up to half a mile away really is. They’re sniper rifles. Not hunting rifles.

The term “hunting rifle” was created to make these guns seem innocuous and non-threatening. But the reality - the truth that they’re covering up - is that they’re by far THE deadliest types of guns available in terms of power, range and accuracy. They fire a bullet which can be 3-7 times MORE powerful than the bullet from an AR-16. They have telescopes which enable the shooter to see targets (otherwise known as “victims”) from over 1,000 yards away, and the gun is capable of hitting and instantly killing a person from nearly a mile away in most cases, and even farther with some of the most powerful bullets available.

Can they be used to hunt deers? Of course they can. But that doesn’t change their actual intended design - for shooting humans at extreme distances.

And most people are duped into not knowing what they really are when liars like you call them “hunting rifles”. Take your NRA lies someplace else.

They’re not hunting rifles. They’re sniper rifles.

It would be tremendous for everyone if you refrain from discussing topics which you clearly have no knowledge of.