“he didn’t go thru a background check for the gun he used in Odessa.”
This leads me to believe that the gun was illegally obtained by a cash-only sale. Until they come out with why and when he failed a firearm background check, I’m going to assume this to be the case.
There are probably some pro-life protesters who've been charged with same crime stemming from a protest.
Is it enough to fail a background check?
Or was he a meth user as has been unverifiably reported?
Private transfers without licensed dealers as intermediaries are legal in many states. Even where that is not legal, though, criminals or addicts can and often do buy firearms illegally.
I’m more interested in the reason for his failing a background check to buy a firearm. It seems that there may be an unpublished criminal record, an adjudication of mental unfitness, an admission on a 4473 form that he was using a narcotic (e.g., marijuana) or another related reason.
That, or he purchased the rifle before he racked up "disqualifiers". All I've seen reported were misdemeanor charges, but he may have hit the Lautenberg Amendment "domestic violence" tripwire at a later date.
Since records of successful background checks are only kept for 24 hours by the NICS before being deleted, it's quite likely the firearm he had was legally purchased in the past before an event occurred that caused him to fail a subsequent check.
Failed background checks are kept indefinitely, though they aren’t kept in the NICS database indefinitely. The NICS logs those transactions and keeps a database of denied applications for a period of 10 years, after which it is transferred to an FBI database.
I've read all kinds of stuff from he was a meth head, two time felon and so forth.
His arrest record are misdemeanors. This would not have kept him from passing a background check in Texas unless it was recent convictions...then he'd have a waiting period before being qualified again.
I read the guy was associated with Antifa...anyone else read this sort of stuff?