FBI Director says background check wasn't good enough

[Titansfan]

Saw it on the news tonight that D. Roof's gun was purchased illegally and he should have failed the background check.  He had a felony arrest 2 months before purchase of the .45 caliber handgun.  Unless I am mistaken, had the youngster been to court and matter resolved?  If so, at the very least, he would have been on a Judicial Diversion and been on probation, background check would have caught it.

 

FBI Director was complaining that the 3 day waiting period in South Carolina was not enough time.  I figure something is up and now the battle flag if down,  elected Conservatives (what's left of them) are on the ropes and since it's a hot issue go after the guns too.  

 

Prior to the Brady Bill, there wasn't background checks on long guns in TN, but became part of background check after the bill went into effect.  Anyone remember the 15 day waiting period on handguns?  I am concerned the waiting periods will return......

[jtmaze]

We haven't heard the end of this, that is for sure.

[Oh Shoot]

Big head start here:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/89202-sc-shooting-was-with-illegal-gun/

 

And no, apparently felony charge was still pending, was just running around free on bail.

 

- OS

Edited July 11, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[A.J. Holst]

Early on I heard an interview with a SC Legislator, he pointed out that SC had stricter laws than than new proposed "minimum guidelines" as suggested by the fed.

Don't pass laws you can't or won't enforce.

[bersaguy]

If Roof was as determined to do what he did he would have bought a gun out of some gun smugglers trunk to complete what he planned to do. He was a bad guy and bad guys seldom obey the law. I do feel that if a person is out on bail for a felony charge it should be on record to prevent him purchasing the gun through legal channels until after his trial but either way he would have gotten a gun.............jmho

[btq96r]

If Roof was as determined to do what he did he would have bought a gun out of some gun smugglers trunk to complete what he planned to do. He was a bad guy and bad guys seldom obey the law. I do feel that if a person is out on bail for a felony charge it should be on record to prevent him purchasing the gun through legal channels until after his trial but either way he would have gotten a gun.............jmho

 

The fact that Roof tried to get a gun though the normal channels, despite having a record shows he didn't avail himself of the opportunity to buy one off the record and makes me think he didn't have it available in the first place.  This guy seemed like the kind of window licker who didn't have many friends or connections, so I'm not so sure he would have been able to get one as easily as the process you lay out suggests.  If I was doing a private sale, based on the look of the kid from his social media posts my spidey senses would have been tingeing big time.

 

Regardless of how either side of the issue is spinning it, the bottom line is that there was a failure due to human error, a systematic error, or some combination of the both.  The feds should be looking into how it happened and taking steps to correct it. 

 

Bi-lateral agreements with state or even county agencies to share information via computer records should be standard in 2015.  A federal reviewer should be able to log into and query a name or SSN in any of the 50 states.  Roof should have been a no-go for his gun purchase.  That's the one indisputable fact in all this.

[Oh Shoot]

.. Roof should have been a no-go for his gun purchase.  That's the one indisputable fact in all this.

 

Dunno if that's indisputable. 

 

About half the reports of the drug arrest claim it was a felony, about half say misdemeanor, so dunno. I'm suspecting it was a 'meanor at this point since FBI director isn't mentioning it, as one is ineligible while "indicted or under information" for any felony.

 

As far as the "unlawful user/addicted"  drug part, he hadn't been convicted, so seems a bit premature to legally claim he was . And what about the many thousands of folks who have a misdemeanor conviction for possession of various drugs -- AFAIK they are not tagged as ineligible to buy firearms just because their conviction involved drugs.

 

- OS

Edited July 11, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[Jonnin]

No system can catch the guy that has never done anything wrong but has decided he is GOING to.   This guy is not far off from that ... he may have had some brushes with the law but was not YET actually a CONVICTED felon.  

 

Its like trying to implement a system to detect future drunk drivers or who is likely to cause a fatal accident by playing with their cell phone.   Some things, we can't do.

[btq96r]

Dunno if that's indisputable. 

 

About half the reports of the drug arrest claim it was a felony, about half say misdemeanor, so dunno. I'm suspecting it was a 'meanor at this point since FBI director isn't mentioning it, as one is ineligible while "indicted or under information" for any felony.

 

As far as the "unlawful user/addicted"  drug part, he hadn't been convicted, so seems a bit premature to legally claim he was . And what about the many thousands of folks who have a misdemeanor conviction for possession of various drugs -- AFAIK they are not tagged as ineligible to buy firearms just because their conviction involved drugs.

 

- OS

 

Fair points.

[Someotherguy]

Regardless of weather they screwed up or whatever happened, you can just about guarantee that some democrat/s are drawing up some new bill as we speak to make all of us pay dearly for their screw up...

[Oh Shoot]

Early on I heard an interview with a SC Legislator, he pointed out that SC had stricter laws than than new proposed "minimum guidelines" as suggested by the fed.

Don't pass laws you can't or won't enforce.

 

As far as buying/transferring guns, I don't think SC has any more stringent laws than federal ones. If so, I'd like to hear what they are.

 

We do here, because were are a federal "Point of Contact" for firearm transactions and insert some differences in the process,  but SC is not.

 

- OS

Edited July 12, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[K191145]

Right after the shooting I kept hearing that his DAD had bought him that gun for his birthday. when did that story change?

[DaveTN]

I don’t think we have enough information from reliable sources to know what happened; but we will.

At first I thought the FBI wouldn’t admit making a mistake unless they made one (the questions surrounding the arrests/convictions/accusations) with plenty of folks looking for someone to sue other than the only person responsible. But then I thought maybe they would if they think it would help their agenda to toughen up background checks, increase their budget, or help with gun control. After all, if they are sued they don’t have to pay the money; we do.

I've never seen an answer to: Does SC have private party gun sales with no background check or permits required?

[DaveTN]

Right after the shooting I kept hearing that his DAD had bought him that gun for his birthday. when did that story change?

When they traced the gun. I think that story was from family or friends that said his Dad bought him a gun for his birthday. His Dad may have given him money, but it seems pretty clear at this time that the killer bought the gun.

[Jonnin]

Right after the shooting I kept hearing that his DAD had bought him that gun for his birthday. when did that story change?

 

about 2 days later... 

 

these

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3129887/Dylann-Roof-21-suspected-murdering-nine-race-hate-church-crime-got-gun-birthday-arrested-twice-year-drug-trespassing-charges.html

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/06/18/the-legal-loophole-that-allowed-dylann-roof-to-get-a-gun/

 

are still out there saying his dad bought it for him, which seems to be incorrect.

 

Newer stuff says

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/18/everything-known-about-charleston-church-shooting-suspect-dylann-roof.html

 

According to Roof’s grandfather and Meeks, the man's family gave him money for his birthday this past April, which it is believed he used to purchase a .45-caliber Glock pistol.

 

I have not seen anything that proves it either way but they should have, by now, been able to trace the gun to its most recent buyer which should clear that up, but if that was released to the public, my search missed it.  I didn't dig too deep, I don't personally care where he got it. 

[Dolomite_supafly]

The last 4-5 mass shootings involved Glocks. I say we outlaw them.

[Oh Shoot]

.....
I've never seen an answer to: Does SC have private party gun sales with no background check or permits required?

 

Yes.

[DaveTN]

Yes.

Then unless you are a lawyer looking for a payday, or an anti-gun activist looking to lay blame; how he got a gun is really a moot point isn’t it?

[Hershmeister]

The last 4-5 mass shootings involved Glocks. I say we outlaw them.

We should outlaw mass shootings

Oh wait.....