Posted on 11/06/2017 5:50:18 AM PST by Zakeet
I just posted this on another thread but it fits here too.
Is it completely impossible to imagine the background check system being subverted to allow some deranged creeps who are prohibited to get approval to purchase firearms?
Keep in mind that the DOJ and FBI etc have been hiring almost exclusively non-white male SJWs for the past decade, and it gets even worse in terms of an agenda. Read about the FBI involvement on the wrong side in the Garland TX event that would have been a massacre.
Links below.
And of course, let’s not forget Operation Fast and Furious, which involved ATF and FBI from CA to TX, not only AZ. No whistle blowers came forward until after BP Agent Terry (a brother FLEA) was killed. None of them seemed to mind the basic OFAF plan, to push guns to cartels in Mexico, to rack up a body count of Mexicans, in order to slime the 2nd Amd.
So is it out of bounds to even imagine a program to allow deranged lunatics to purchase firearms?
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/08/08/pamela-geller-fbi-want-us-dead-garland/
“There is a Big Difference in the Law, Assault does not prevent you from firearm ownership.”
A year in prison and a dishonorable discharge does.
Is there a meaningful fine for the store that approves such a sale? There certainly should be. They are the first line of defense against these nut jobs.
>> A criminal will get a firearm if he wants one; no law will change his heart <<
Indeed. If he can’t get a truck at Home Deport or enough fertilizer at his local co-op, or if he can’t find a way to put cyanide in the water supply, then for sure he can beg, borrow, buy or steal a gun. Really doesn’t take a genius.
A BCD doesn’t prevent you from buying. I thought it was a DD.
What a mess.
He was court marshaled, did time, and has a dishonorable discharge for his actions, yet you want to pick on the word used to decide if he should be legally able to purchase a weapon.
>> Radio reported the Perp lied on 4473. <<
Looks as if Congress needs to make it illegal to do this kinda lying. A new law of the sort should stop these mass shootings.
So FedGov entity A can’t send a data file to FedGov entity B on a regular basis. Thanks Obama!
You are right but this dirt bag got a DD (Read: Dishonorable Discharge) A DD would not pass muster for a background check for a hand gun. A DD is similar to a felon.
“He was court marshaled, did time, and has a dishonorable discharge for his actions, yet you want to pick on the word used to decide if he should be legally able to purchase a weapon.”
The LAW is all about words. Assault involving family may not legally qualify as domestic violence, and a BCD is not a DD, and being sentenced to a year is not the same as being sentenced to OVER a year.
But the other side is that a discharge determination on the paperwork of a DD 214 is a code of which most people don’t understand. They can’t tell what the discharge actually is unless there is someone in the works that knows codes. This happens often and a lot of people are getting away with many things. So passing a carry with a history with a negative military problem is not unusual. And the system is not infallible.
rwood
Many unqualified purchasers simply lie on the application form and the background checks seldom catch the lie.
Why wouldn’t the FBI clear one of its own stooges?
The ATF requires a Federal firearms Licensed dealer to complete a Form 4473 prior to a sale of firearms. The background check is run thru three data bases. If nothing is found it is approved. If questioned it can be stopped for three days. After three days if not denied the sale can be completed. The FFL holders are very careful with this form. If it is not completely filled out properly they can be fined and their license revoked. Almost all FFL dealers have two people check this form one of which is a manager. This procedure is controlled by the ATF.
For a person to have a concealed carry license in Texas he must have a different background check done by State. It is this background check (I believe) that the Governor stated he failed.
You are right, the law is all about words. That doesn’t always equate with justice, does it? It all depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is, huh?
In Rahms azz, at the Manhole Club in Chicago, from reliable reports.
A serious thread, I know.
But the slip of the finger draws a smile.
The Texas Governor was on TV saying he was denied....hope they get the story straight somewhere down the line....
...The reports I saw and heard said he was convicted of “Assault” and not Domestic Violence, There is a Big Difference in the Law, Assault does not prevent you from firearm ownership...
Close, but not quite. Loss of firearm rights falls under the Lautenberg Act, which covers physical force or the attempt of the use of physical force.
As enacted the statute defines “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” (MCDV) as any state or federal misdemeanor that -
“has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.”
This definition includes all misdemeanors that involve the use or attempted use of physical force (e.g., simple assault, assault and battery), if the offense is committed by one of the defined parties
Quit being dense dude. He’s saying the LEGAL TERM under which you’re convicted DETERMINES how you’re treated with respect to firearms ownership. DV prohibits, Simple assault doesn’t. Get it? If he plead to, or was only charged with simple assault it doesn’t matter what the actual circumstances were, the record would show a non disabling conviction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.