http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...qus_thread


Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) is pushing gun control after poor federal reporting helped Texas killer Devin Kelley pass a background check to obtain his rifle.
Kelley used that rifle to kill 26 people on November 5, when he opened fire on congregants of First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.



I have to admit this one surprised me.

Did you read it?

He's pushing a bill to remind federal employees of their responsibility to report instances that would prevent people like that from being able to purchase a firearm due to laws already on the books (background checks). The law is aimed at people who should have, but didn't... do their job. This is not adding further gun control measures. But, whatever makes you sleep better.

The OP's profession should scare the sh*t out of all of us.

(11-08-2017 12:03 PM)CoastGuardHawk06 Wrote:  Did you read it?

He's pushing a bill to remind federal employees of their responsibility to report instances that would prevent people like that from being able to purchase a firearm due to laws already on the books (background checks). The law is aimed at people who should have, but didn't... do their job. This is not adding further gun control measures. But, whatever makes you sleep better.

I'll admit it's a strange law but the main reason why I posted it is to show that this issue seems to be reaching critical mass. Congress is starting to feel the pressure.

I have no doubt that Cornyn is probably just doing a CYA so he can tell his constituents that he tired to do something.

I still think it's different than what we have seen in the passed.

IMO this is more government control than gun control.

It also says a lot about the federal government if we have to pass laws to get federal employees to do the job they are assigned. And there's people who want to give such incompetence control over our healthcare.

(11-08-2017 12:03 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The OP's profession should scare the sh*t out of all of us.

Kids please open your books to the chapter on trolling message boards and Fitfails

(11-08-2017 12:03 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The OP's profession should scare the sh*t out of all of us.

Note for parents. Tell the teachers what they wanna hear, get your A, and laugh at them the rest of your life. It's an American tradition.

(11-08-2017 12:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO this is more government control than gun control.

It also says a lot about the federal government if we have to pass laws to get federal employees to do the job they are assigned. And there's people who want to give such incompetence control over our healthcare.

I say whatever it takes to make the system work better.

As for healthcare, I think you mean health insurance.

(11-08-2017 03:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 12:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO this is more government control than gun control.
It also says a lot about the federal government if we have to pass laws to get federal employees to do the job they are assigned. And there's people who want to give such incompetence control over our healthcare.

I say whatever it takes to make the system work better.
As for healthcare, I think you mean health insurance.

Insurance now, care later.

(11-08-2017 03:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 12:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO this is more government control than gun control.

It also says a lot about the federal government if we have to pass laws to get federal employees to do the job they are assigned. And there's people who want to give such incompetence control over our healthcare.

I say whatever it takes to make the system work better.

As for healthcare, I think you mean health insurance.

No, I said exactly what I meant. There's a number of politicians and posters on here who desire socialized medicine.

But to your point I don't want an organization that has to have laws to tell it to fulfill the duties of it's job to handle my health insurance either.

(11-08-2017 12:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO this is more government control than gun control.

It also says a lot about the federal government if we have to pass laws to get federal employees to do the job they are assigned. And there's people who want to give such incompetence control over our healthcare.

Bingo.

Fit, nobody missed you. Go back into your hole.

(11-08-2017 12:07 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'll admit it's a strange law but the main reason why I posted it is to show that this issue seems to be reaching critical mass. Congress is starting to feel the pressure.

FFS fit... 2nd amendment supporters have been saying, for years, there are enough laws alread and that they just need to be enforced.

Stop pretending this is some kind of revelation moment for 2nd amendment supporters.

Over 90% of gun owners want dishonorably discharged felon nutcase domestic abusers who escape from mental hospitals properly registered in the NCIC to prevent them from getting guns. Seems like Cornyn is in with the crowd.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(11-08-2017 04:09 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 12:07 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'll admit it's a strange law but the main reason why I posted it is to show that this issue seems to be reaching critical mass. Congress is starting to feel the pressure.

FFS fit... 2nd amendment supporters have been saying, for years, there are enough laws alread and that they just need to be enforced.

Stop pretending this is some kind of revelation moment for 2nd amendment supporters.

It doesn't matter which law you pass, someone is always going to slip through the cracks. That doesn't mean however that you should hesitate to make laws.

For the life of my I cannot understand how the same people who insist on enforcement of laws to the letter are at the same time weary of new laws being written.

It's a very interesting dynamic.

(11-08-2017 04:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 04:09 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 12:07 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'll admit it's a strange law but the main reason why I posted it is to show that this issue seems to be reaching critical mass. Congress is starting to feel the pressure.

FFS fit... 2nd amendment supporters have been saying, for years, there are enough laws alread and that they just need to be enforced.

Stop pretending this is some kind of revelation moment for 2nd amendment supporters.

It doesn't matter which law you pass, someone is always going to slip through the cracks. That doesn't mean however that you should hesitate to make laws.

For the life of my I cannot understand how the same people who insist on enforcement of laws to the letter are at the same time weary of new laws being written.

It's a very interesting dynamic.

Because its all political games with little meaning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(11-08-2017 04:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It doesn't matter which law you pass, someone is always going to slip through the cracks.

Something else second amendment supporters have been saying for years...

Quote:For the life of my I cannot understand how the same people who insist on enforcement of laws to the letter are at the same time weary of new laws being written.

Every law curtails liberty, *every law*. If you don't enforce the agreed upon laws and propose new ones than all you're doing is chipping away at my liberty because you're too damn lazy to enforce those laws we already agreed on.

(11-08-2017 04:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It doesn't matter which law you pass, someone is always going to slip through the cracks. That doesn't mean however that you should hesitate to make laws.

For the life of my I cannot understand how the same people who insist on enforcement of laws to the letter are at the same time weary of new laws being written.

It's a very interesting dynamic.

Because this is a law that basically says "Enforce the other law"

It's absolutely nothing but meaningless grandstanding.


This is what needs to happen and will accomplish the same goal without complicating the legal code.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

Quote:The Pentagon has known for at least two decades about failures to give military criminal history information to the FBI, including the type of information the Air Force didn't report about the Texas church gunman who had assaulted his wife and stepson while an airman.

The Air Force lapse in the Devin P. Kelley case, which is now under review by the Pentagon's inspector general, made it possible for him to buy guns before his attack Sunday at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Twenty-six people were killed, including multiple members of some families. About 20 other people were wounded.

Quote:Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Tuesday he has directed the Pentagon inspector general to review circumstances of the Kelley case and "define what the problem is."

At its core, the problem is that military criminal investigative organizations have too frequently, for too long, failed to comply with rules for reporting service members' criminal history data to the FBI.

As recently as February 2015, the Pentagon inspector general reported that hundreds of convicted offenders' fingerprints were not submitted to the FBI's criminal history database. The report found about a 30 percent failure rate for submitting fingerprints and criminal case outcomes. It did not determine the reasons for the lapses.

In February this year, the inspector general's office launched a new review to assess compliance with updated reporting requirements. A spokesman, Bruce Anderson, said that review is ongoing.

The problem has persisted much longer.

A February 1997 report by the Pentagon inspector general found widespread lapses. Fingerprint cards were not submitted to the FBI criminal history files in more than 80 percent of cases in the Army and Navy, and 38 percent in the Air Force.

Failure to report the outcome of criminal cases was 79 percent in the Army and 50 percent in the Air Force, the report said. In the Navy, it was 94 percent.

"The lack of reporting to the FBI criminal history files prevents civilian law enforcement agencies from having significant information on military offenders," the report concluded. It cited several reasons for the lapses, including ambiguous Pentagon guidelines and a lack of interest among the military services in submitting information to an FBI viewed as chronically overburdened with data.

I would imagine that shortly after the Pentagon review that there will be a DOD regulation across all branches that accomplishes the same goals as this law, and unlike the bill which will assuredly have riders attached it will deal solely with the problem in this case: failure of the military to comply with existing regulations.

(11-08-2017 04:05 PM)BuffaloTN Wrote:  Fit, nobody missed you. Go back into your hole.

Uncalled for.

(11-08-2017 04:26 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 04:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It doesn't matter which law you pass, someone is always going to slip through the cracks. That doesn't mean however that you should hesitate to make laws.

For the life of my I cannot understand how the same people who insist on enforcement of laws to the letter are at the same time weary of new laws being written.

It's a very interesting dynamic.

Because this is a law that basically says "Enforce the other law"

It's absolutely nothing but meaningless grandstanding.


This is what needs to happen and will accomplish the same goal without complicating the legal code.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

Quote:The Pentagon has known for at least two decades about failures to give military criminal history information to the FBI, including the type of information the Air Force didn't report about the Texas church gunman who had assaulted his wife and stepson while an airman.

The Air Force lapse in the Devin P. Kelley case, which is now under review by the Pentagon's inspector general, made it possible for him to buy guns before his attack Sunday at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Twenty-six people were killed, including multiple members of some families. About 20 other people were wounded.

Quote:Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Tuesday he has directed the Pentagon inspector general to review circumstances of the Kelley case and "define what the problem is."

At its core, the problem is that military criminal investigative organizations have too frequently, for too long, failed to comply with rules for reporting service members' criminal history data to the FBI.

As recently as February 2015, the Pentagon inspector general reported that hundreds of convicted offenders' fingerprints were not submitted to the FBI's criminal history database. The report found about a 30 percent failure rate for submitting fingerprints and criminal case outcomes. It did not determine the reasons for the lapses.

In February this year, the inspector general's office launched a new review to assess compliance with updated reporting requirements. A spokesman, Bruce Anderson, said that review is ongoing.

The problem has persisted much longer.

A February 1997 report by the Pentagon inspector general found widespread lapses. Fingerprint cards were not submitted to the FBI criminal history files in more than 80 percent of cases in the Army and Navy, and 38 percent in the Air Force.

Failure to report the outcome of criminal cases was 79 percent in the Army and 50 percent in the Air Force, the report said. In the Navy, it was 94 percent.

"The lack of reporting to the FBI criminal history files prevents civilian law enforcement agencies from having significant information on military offenders," the report concluded. It cited several reasons for the lapses, including ambiguous Pentagon guidelines and a lack of interest among the military services in submitting information to an FBI viewed as chronically overburdened with data.

I would imagine that shortly after the Pentagon review that there will be a DOD regulation across all branches that accomplishes the same goals as this law, and unlike the bill which will assuredly have riders attached it will deal solely with the problem in this case: failure of the military to comply with existing regulations.

"An FBI chronically overburdened with data".

A military that probably doesn't really want info on all of its internal criminal problems in a civilian database.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk