Background Check Flaw Let Dylann Roof Buy Gun

Background Check Flaw Let Dylann Roof Buy Gun, F.B.I. Says
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTJULY 10, 2015

WASHINGTON — The man accused of killing nine people in a historically black church in South Carolina last month should not have been able to buy the gun he used in the attack, the F.B.I. said Friday, in what was the latest acknowledgment of flaws in the national background check system.

A loophole in the system and an error by the F.B.I. allowed the man, Dylann Roof, to buy the .45-caliber handgun despite having previously admitted to drug possession, officials said.

Mr. Roof first tried to buy the gun on April 11, from a dealer in South Carolina. The F.B.I., which conducts background checks for gun sales, did not give the dealer approval to proceed with the purchase because the bureau needed to do more investigating about Mr. Roof’s s criminal history.

Under federal law, the F.B.I. has three days to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to deny the purchase. If the bureau cannot come up with an answer, the purchaser can return to the dealer and buy the gun.

In the case of Mr. Roof, the F.B.I. failed to gain access to a police report in which he admitted to having been in possession of a controlled substance, which would have disqualified him from purchasing the weapon. The F.B.I. said that confusion about where the arrest had occurred had prevented it from acquiring the arrest record in a timely fashion.

Mr. Roof’s application was not resolved within the three-day limit because the F.B.I. was still trying to get the arrest record, and he returned to store and was sold the gun.

Many major national gun dealers, like Walmart, will not sell the weapon to the buyer if they do not have an answer from F.B.I., but many smaller stores will.

“We are all sick this happened,” said the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey. “We wish we could turn back time.”

Mr. Comey said the F.B.I. had begun informing the victims’ family members on Friday about the breakdown. He also said he had ordered the bureau’s inspections division to conduct a review of the incident and report its findings to him within 30 days.

Mr. Roof has been charged with murder in the attack at the Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston.


The F.B.I. operates the background check system, called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and loopholes have been discovered in it before. One allowed thousands of prohibited buyers to legally purchase firearms over the past decade — and some of those weapons were ultimately used in crimes, according to court records and government documents. That problem stemmed from the three-day period the government has to determine whether someone is eligible to buy a gun.

After a 2007 shooting in which 33 people died at Virginia Tech University, investigators discovered that the gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, also should not have been able to buy a gun because a court had previously declared him to be a danger to himself. The shooting led to legislation aimed at improving the background check system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/background-check-flaw-let-dylann-roof-buy-gun-fbi-says.html?_r=0

I don't think that an admission of drug possession should bar someone from owning a gun anyway. People like roof should be barred from gun ownership, but not because they get high Phone Post 3.0

so what you're saying is gun laws do nothing to provent murders from getting a gun

 

glad to see you have come to this realizaiton.

 

welcome to reality.

Actually, this gun law would have, had it been properly followed. Phone Post 3.0

The article is not very clear. I'm confused on which question would have denied him.

https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download

That is a pdf of a 4473. Phone Post 3.0

Your statement is akin to say trains are useless for moving freight because they can break. Very dumb. Very Phone Post 3.0

"Mr. Roof’s application was not resolved within the three-day limit because the F.B.I. was still trying to get the arrest record, and he returned to store and was sold the gun.

Many major national gun dealers, like Walmart, will not sell the weapon to the buyer if they do not have an answer from F.B.I., but many smaller stores will."

This sounds like a problem. Law needs some revision Phone Post 3.0

Ari2 - "Mr. Roof’s application was not resolved within the three-day limit because the F.B.I. was still trying to get the arrest record, and he returned to store and was sold the gun.

Many major national gun dealers, like Walmart, will not sell the weapon to the buyer if they do not have an answer from F.B.I., but many smaller stores will."

This sounds like a problem. Law needs some revision Phone Post 3.0
Not a problem with the law, it's a problem with the FBI conducting background checks Phone Post 3.0

It sounds like you can buy a gun after 3 days if the check isn't completed.i don't like that at all. Phone Post 3.0

Ari2 - Actually, this gun law would have, had it been properly followed. Phone Post 3.0

Just like drug laws stop people from getting drugs, right?

Ari2 - Your statement is akin to say trains are useless for moving freight because they can break. Very dumb. Very Phone Post 3.0


no it's akin to saying a law about speeding dont prevent high speed accidents.



people who want to speed will speed, just like,



people who want to murder people will murder people



 



 



when anti-gun people realize this the faster it can stop being a nonsensical political issue and politicians can get back to worrying about things that they can actually affect.

... And the goalposts move. Good job glove gate.. You've started with th e fallacies right out the gate. Nothing in this case gives credence to the idea that he would have been able to get a gun elsewhere, or that he would have even tried. He tried to buy a gun legally, shouldn't have been able to under the law, and was able to due to a loophole. End of story. Phone Post 3.0

"no it's akin to saying a law about speeding dont prevent high speed accidents'

Ahh. Well then. Let's do away with laws entirely. They don't stop anything. Right? Phone Post 3.0

Ari2 - "no it's akin to saying a law about speeding dont prevent high speed accidents'

Ahh. Well then. Let's do away with laws entirely. They don't stop anything. Right? Phone Post 3.0
I've read somewhere that people still commit murder, I guess it's just a useless law. Phone Post 3.0

Ari2 - "no it's akin to saying a law about speeding dont prevent high speed accidents'

Ahh. Well then. Let's do away with laws entirely. They don't stop anything. Right? Phone Post 3.0


what was that you were just saying about fallacies?



 



 

Trust - 


Three days to resolve that seems far too short a time.  



I'm curious as to whether Roof answered those questions in the affirmative, or whether the FBI had some indication as to his arrest. 


I understand that the three days is a safety precaution for firearm rights, and support it. If the FBI can simply ignore them all without evidence, or choose to ignore from specific individuals, groups, etc, without issuing a real statement we'd be fucked. I do hope that if the situation was as written, where they knew there was a conviction or arrest but couldn't find a record, they had the option to issue a temporary stop or prolong that 3 day period.

If that isn't an option when there is unreconciled arrest data, it should be. If it is an option now, the people involved should be fired and tried.

'what was that you were just saying about fallacies?"

Do you think that's a strawman? Have I incorrectly deduced your point? Gun laws don't prevent All gun murders, therfore we should scrap them. Speed limits don't prevent All accidents so we should what? Make your point if you don't want me to attempt to suss it out for you. Phone Post 3.0

gun laws don't prevent ANY MURDERS is the point, nothing you could ever post, hint at, state, will ever demonstrate a single murder prevented by a single gun law.

 

NONE.

 

heck as demonstrated by this article  gun laws specifically didn't prevent many murders.

 

and guess what it's even worse for your argument

 

change the law to  4 days 5 days a week a month, nothing suggests that the "loophole" that happened in this case doesn't happen with a month long process. 

"gun laws don't prevent ANY MURDERS is the point"

There is literally no way to support this statement. I welcome you to try in vain though. Phone Post 3.0

and for the record your fallacy wasn't a strawman, but a false dilemna (your, "if one law doesn't do anything and is useless, then we might as well just get rid of all laws right?" statement)