Posted on 07/10/2015 10:06:43 AM PDT by navysealdad
The last I initially heard his dad gave the gun to him as a birthday present. Imagine that...
OMG I have seen someone post that every single time this subject comes up.
NO THE FATHER DID NOT BUY THE GUN
NO THE FATHER DID NOT BUY THE GUN
NO THE FATHER DID NOT BUY THE GUN
NO THE FATHER DID NOT BUY THE GUN
I thought we were better informed around here!
p.s.- comment not meant to be directed negatively at you Mr. Shoe.
Per Fox News (Harris Faulkner is much prettier than shep!)...
A felony arrest the previous Spring (winter?), should have kept the little maniac from making the purchase. Mumble mumble data entry error...mumble mumble not sure where the issue occurred.
Of note, a review of NICS databases and checks is planned. If chicanery was to be ... ‘chicaned’ a tinfoil hat observation would have the holders of that data calling a halt to checks until the process could be thoroughly evaluated and overhauled.
Just a tinfoil observation.
KYPD
Notice he did not say that Roof failed the background check. He is saying the background check failed.
Guess we need to ban gun purchases from anyone who ever visited Gettysburg/s
I thought ,,,
therefore,I am.
don’t give a rip much ,,
Meaning the government needs much more access to real-time state info, mere drug possession charges will be enough to make you a prohibited person, and there will be a push to disqualify anyone who has ever been to a psych treatment.
They are saying that by admitting to drug possession when he was arrested, that he is disqualified from possessing a firearm. That is not correct, based on everything I know.
Meaning he bought the gun, went through government operated background check, and was given clearance when he should have been denied clearance. Basically, the government broke the law.
Ban the check system loophole!
It's also why the PTB are pining for war or some other "common enemy" to rally the public behind.
A misdemeanor drug arrest is not enough to disqualify a person on a 4473, from what I know. The FBI director seems to be trying to expand the definition of "prohibited person" on his own.
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.