Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
Fri Jul 10, 2015, 04:28 PM Jul 2015

FBI Director: Dylann Roof Shouldn’t Have Been Able To Buy Gun

FBI Director James Comey on Friday said a federal background check examiner missed an arrest report that should have blocked the alleged South Carolina church shooter from obtaining the weapon used in the attack.

posted on Jul. 10, 2015, at 3:00 p.m.

Dylann Roof, the alleged mass shooter who killed nine people at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina, should not have been able to buy the firearm used in the attack, FBI Director James Comey said on Friday.

In comments made during a meeting at FBI headquarters, and first reported by the Washington Post, Comey said failures in the federal background check system may have allowed Roof to acquire the weapon used in the mass shooting last month.

According to the FBI, Roof’s name should have been entered into the bureau’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System after an arrest in April in which he admitted possessing illegal drugs.

Comey said the FBI background check examiner missed Roof’s arrest when she evaluated his request to purchase a gun because the wrong police agency was listed, the Associated Press reported.

“We are all sick this happened,” Comey said. “We wish we could turn back time.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mikehayes/fbi-director-dylann-roof-shouldnt-have-been-able-to-buy-gun#.mwZYdXLpDV

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

randys1

(16,286 posts)
1. Remove all guns to well regulated militias, as the 2nd CLEARLY requires, and the worst this
Fri Jul 10, 2015, 04:32 PM
Jul 2015

ass could do is stab a couple folks before his ass would be royally beaten.

If you (not the OP but the collective you) waste your time with some bullshit why the 2nd doesnt say EXACTLY what it clearly says, dont, I wont read it, dont need to, you see because I can read the 2nd amendment and it could NOT be clearer.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
3. snip*
Fri Jul 10, 2015, 04:52 PM
Jul 2015

Let’s take a look at exactly what the Founding Fathers put in the Constitution and other laws about the Militia:

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists among the powers of Congress: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Article II, Section 2: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;

Amendment 2: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;

That is every reference to the Militia in the Constitution. The description of the Militia in Article I sounds very much like our country’s National Guard. It is supposed to be well-organized with officers and training.

Not only does the Constitution not say anything about bearing arms to use against the government, it specifically says the Militia can be called upon by the President to suppress insurrections against our government.

The Militia Act of 1792, which was passed only three years after our Constitution was ratified, defined how a state militia should be organized. It is not just a loose group of guys with guns. It is a well-organized militia with officers of various ranks, and the members are to receive the same pay and allowances as all troops of the United States.

While most men owned a musket and were expected to become part of the Militia when called upon, there is nothing in the Constitution or the Militia Act that suggests the public should be armed for the purpose of rising up against the government. The Militia Act specifically states that if there is an insurrection against the government, the President is authorized to call up the Militia to suppress that insurrection.

Taken together, the U.S. Constitution and the Militia Act of 1792 state a person has the right to bear arms specifically for the purpose of joining the Militia so you can help defend your country if you are called upon. Over time the Militia has evolved into what is now called the National Guard.

GeorgeIn 1794, during the Whiskey Rebellion, 5,000 men rose up to oppose the government. President George Washington called up the Militia in several states and personally led them to western Pennsylvania to put down the rebellion.

It’s not my intention here to argue that there isn’t a right to bear arms. The American people generally believe that there exists such a right, regardless of how the Second Amendment is interpreted. I am only pointing out that the claims by gun extremists about the intention of the Second Amendment being to allow the public to take up arms against our government is completely false. The Constitution, the Militia Act of 1792, and the actions of President George Washington certainly refute that claim.

Before anyone distorts what I am saying, let me clarify. I don’t want to confiscate the guns of law-abiding gun owners. I don’t want to disarm the American people, and I don’t want to ban all guns.

The Constitution does not recognize an unlimited right to own the most powerful and lethal weapons. There is no prohibition against commonsense restrictions like limiting the capacity of a firearm, requiring a waiting period or background check before buying a gun, or limiting certain features of a gun that make it especially useful for killing large numbers of
people with little effort.


http://www.progressivepress.net/myth-the-second-amendment-exists-to-enable-the-american-people-to-rise-up/

Disarming America will be almost impossible, when you consider that our gun culture has been so intensified
by the NRA for profit/gun makers...Mom's feel they need to take a loaded pistol in their purse to go shopping.

That is irrational thinking but it is part of the American psyche even though these very people may die from guns
due to accidents vs a planned murder.

An uphill battle and another reason why I support the fight for public funded elections..we do not have enough
open conversations about our gun culture to change it from its present form.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
4. That's what I thought was the case too, so I am not so sure how that went down since
Fri Jul 10, 2015, 04:54 PM
Jul 2015

reading this latest.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
7. FBI Director Comey: "System Failure" allowed Dylann Roof to Buy Gun"--Wish We Could Turn Back Time"
Sat Jul 11, 2015, 09:20 AM
Jul 2015

FBI Director Comey: "System Failure" allowed Dylann Roof to Buy the Gun"

BBC: 10 July 2015


Comey: "We are all sick that this happened. We wish we could turn back time,"


The man accused of killing nine black churchgoers in South Carolina last month was able to buy a gun due to a background check failure, the FBI says.

Dylann Roof should have been stopped from purchasing a weapon due to a felony charge, FBI chief James Comey told reporters on Friday.

But he said the charge was either incorrectly entered into a background check system or mishandled by analysts.


Roof is facing nine counts of murder over the 17 June attack in Charleston.

Speaking to reporters at FBI headquarters in Washington DC, Mr Comey outlined a series of missed opportunities and incomplete paperwork that allowed Mr Roof to buy a firearm.

Mr Roof, 21, was charged with possessing drugs just weeks before the attack on the Emanuel AME Church, and police said he admitted to the offence.

That admission should have been enough to stop him from buying a weapon, Mr Comey said, but the offence was incorrectly added to Mr Roof's record.

This meant the FBI analyst doing the mandatory background check on Mr Roof did not see it. "If she had seen that police report," Mr Comey said, "that purchase would have been denied."

He said he learned about the problem on Thursday night and FBI officials were meeting with relatives of the nine victims on Friday.

An internal review into how the agency uses criminal background checks in gun transactions has been launched. The FBI runs background checks for gun dealers in about 30 states, including South Carolina.

"We are all sick that this happened. We wish we could turn back time," he added.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33487577
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»FBI Director: Dylann Roof...