Background Check Flaw Let Dylann Roof Buy Gun, F.B.I. Says

[Ed Ames]

Remember, the guy had recently been given a pistol by a family member, but chose to buy one to commit this crime (presumably to limit guilt or legal liability for the family member).

"Shooting suspect Dylann Storm Roof's gun was a recent birthday gift from his father, according to a law enforcement source..." -- L.A. Times, June 18th.

As such, if really doesn't matter whether he was delayed or denied. He already had the means to commit the crime.

The FBI "admission" that they delayed past the time limit is agitprop intended to get dealers to treat delays as denials, and/or to encourage lawmakers to eliminate the time limit for background checks.

 

[Scooter22]

I'm waiting for a demand for more than a 3 day delay window. Like a 30 day waiting periode as in some states. But in this case even that wouldn't have saved the day. He had the gun for 2 months before he acted.

 

[BSA1]

You're searching for better gun control, when this is a mental health issue.

Be careful. You are stepping into a liberal trap with that way of thinking. The Liberals current anti-gun control scheme is focusing on people with mental health disorders are a danger to themselves and others and should be prohibited from owning guns.

Once they get the majority of people accepting this lie then it is a merely a simple process of expanding the definitions of and then adding mental disorders to include that they pose a risk to themselves and others. A perfect example is how often "bipolar" is used in news reports involving violent crimes.

Another favorite term being used is "suffering from depression." Since most of us suffer from some form of depression at one time or another (such as job loss, divorce, death of a loved one) this can easily become a effective tool to disarm millions of gun owners. Take their guns with the promise that they can have them back we they can prove they are no longer depressed. Of course that is going to require a medical/mental exam by a Doctor or a panel of say three Doctors certifying that you are not a threat to yourself and others...NOT!

There are people in the U.S. that are just plain evil. They do bad deeds to other innocent people. There is no real explanation for folks like this. It is part of the human condition and has existed all through recorded history.

 

[Jim K]

Under the law, and reflected in the 4473, an arrest, without an indictment or conviction, is not a disqualifier, and arrests are not reported to NCIC, only indictments and convictions. The law always presumes innocence until PROVEN guilty (i.e., convicted) of a crime.

Jim

 

[barnbwt]

I have an uneasy feeling that this press report is an argument disguised as fact. We all know the anti's have long used the tactic of 'if only the background checks had more omniscient access to more personal data, lives might have been saved,' and the attitude from the FBI seems largely the same. Leads me to think they had no legal access to the information they claim disqualified the kid, and are trying to disguise a new call for legislation/regulation to obtain it as a failing in a system already in place and needing mere tweaks. There is a reason the NICS/FBI check system has the limits it does, and we would do well to remember why, even if it does preclude them having a more formidable database.

-Massive numbers of false-positives
-Massive numbers of mistaken identity
-Massive potential for catastrophic security breach (OPM, anyone?)
-Massive numbers of identified prohibited persons that go unprosecuted for lying on a 4473
-Massive potential for an illegal database of owners ('massive potential' meaning 'means and motive')

All and more are valid reasons to oppose the maintenance, let alone expansion, of the current service. The answer is not background checks, nor has it ever been. It is ensuring that those who would be victims have the means of defense available to them should they choose to take that responsibility for themselves, in the inevitable circumstance that an evil man inevitably finds a way to harm others.

TCB

 

[BSA1]

Under the law, and reflected in the 4473, an arrest, without an indictment or conviction, is not a disqualifier, and arrests are not reported to NCIC, only indictments and convictions.

You are mistaken about arrests not reported to NCIC. Arrests can be and usually are entered into NCIC. The problem arises when the agency does not update it with the disposition of the charge(s).

The law always presumes innocence until PROVEN guilty (i.e., convicted) of a crime.

Not true for some crimes such as income tax cases or simply having more cash in your possession than the police think you should have.

 

[Jim K]

LE agencies always want to presume guilt and require that any person arrested prove himself innocent. That way, the police and prosecutors have it easy; they simply carry out mass arrests, say at a gun show, and those arrested are automatically convicted, and banned from owning guns. Would "they" do such a thing? Yep, in a New York second if they were allowed to do so.

Jim

 

[BK]

Be careful. You are stepping into a liberal trap with that way of thinking.

Okay, uh, the other member wanted to dive headlong into steeper gun control regs. Take that side if you will. It's not the first time on THR that I've seen as much.

 

[Snyper]

Remember, the guy had recently been given a pistol by a family member, but chose to buy one to commit this crime (presumably to limit guilt or legal liability for the family member).

"Shooting suspect Dylann Storm Roof's gun was a recent birthday gift from his father, according to a law enforcement source..." -- L.A. Times, June 18th.

That report was later proven to be incorrect.
He was given money for his birthday, and used that money to buy the gun

The evolving narrative of how Dylann Roof got a gun
ABC 7 News
2 hours ago
Jul 10, 2015 · Roof’s friends told NBC that he had used birthday money to make ... files the three day default proceed period was met and Roof was issued the gun.

 

[Edster12]

THis is all leading up to the pushing once again of the liberals gun grabbing legislation. I bet that within the next few weeks you will start hearing about plans to "Close the 3 day Loophole" This will not go thru legislation it will be a modification of policy by the ATF
So get out the pens, pencils, crayons, or what ever you decide to write with --because this is going to happen!!!!!

 

[BSA1]

BK,

The Liberal's (anti-gun folks) know how much guns are a part of America's culture and how the tide has turned against them with them using the same old guns cause crimes arguments. They have watched as new segments of the population such as women have embraced the concept that the Government is not there to protect them and are taking the personal responsibility of self-defense and are buying firearms to defend themselves.

There is no concenus in America as to what the causation of crime is. There are many different theories but none of them have been proven as a reliable repeatable cause of criminal behavior.

Causation of criminal behavior is a very deep and complex issue. Many criminals do share common factors such as illegal drug use. However these factors are characteristics which can not be linked to causing crime.

For example someone steals money to pay for illegal drugs. The quick and easy theory is if the person didn't have a drug habit then he won't have committed the crime. If that theory holds water then sending anyone that uses illegal drugs and who commits a crime to drug rehab program will end their drug addiction and they will not commit any more crimes. Yet this is proven not to be the case.

What we do know is folks have different value systems. What is unacceptable behavior to one is perfectly normal and acceptable for another. The best example is the differences in the beliefs of older and younger generations.

Some behavior simply can not be explained so using the "mental illness" theory is a simplistic seemly logical explanation.

 

[Jeff White]

When an arrest is made the arresting agency completes an arrest card, more commonly known as a fingerprint card.

The arrest card contains identifiers of the person arrested, the charge (s), and other information such as if the person was armed when arrested and any cautions that the arresting agency feels would be appropriate to warn other agencies about the arrestee.

The arrest card is forwarded to the FBI and that updates the criminal history file. In many places this is done electronically at the time the offender is booked.

Arrest cards do not contain specific information pertaining to the arrest. That would be found in narrative reports done by the arresting officer and forwarded to the prosecutor.

Disposition information is forwarded to the FBI by the Court Clerk. The agency that made the arrest has nothing to do with forwarding disposition information. It's very often months later that a case goes to court and often the agency that made the arrest has no idea what happened in court if the officer wasn't needed to testify.

There is no way the NICS operator could have known that Roof admitted to being a drug user. But there should have been no doubt as to where to go to check for that information.

Every LE agency in the country has a unique identifier that goes on the arrest card. A call to the arresting agency, not the prosecutor, should have given them the information they needed to deny the purchase.

With all of the advancements that have been made in automating law enforcement record keeping, they should not have needed to hunt up the arresting officer. A phone call or a directed message to the arresting agency should have gotten the info they needed in plenty of time.

I'm not buying the story that they called the prosecutor who told them to call the agency, who told them to call a different agency. That is most likely a CYA lie.

The arrest card that was submitted had the arresting agency, the arresting officer by name and ID number and the name and ID number of the officer who did the fingerprints.

The arrest card does NOT contain information as to who will prosecute the case (this could be city or county depending on the jurisdiction). There is no way the FBI could know what prosecuting attorney's office to contact because they are not provided that information.

They dropped the ball here and now they are lying to make it seem like there is a flaw in the system that needs to be fixed. I suspect the truth is that follow wasn't done, or wasn't done in a timely manner.

The fact is that they did have the information they needed to follow up. It's on the arrest card and that is what updates the criminal history file that NICS is using.

 

[bikerdoc]

Couple of points:

My wife uses her maiden name for professional reasons. Every time she purchases a gun she expects to be delayed as her name is the same as a lady convicted of murder. To further complicate the matter the SS numbers are close. Ussually gets an approval the next day.

This kid was a 9th grade drop out loner with no job and a history of embracing hate ( sound familiar). Why did his parents think it would be a good idea for him to buy a gun? You need a licence to drive a care but any two morons can raise a kid.

This sounds like an end run to impose tighter controls that we all need to resist now.