Air Force failed to report Devin Kelley's convictions to the FBI

[Medic007]

So, this turd was allowed to buy firearms because the Pentagon didn't do its job, but somehow we need more gun laws to get the job done when we can't get the ones currently on the books correct? Who is going to prison for this blunder?

He fractured his infant son's skull on purpose and beat his wife, but the Air Force can't be bothered to do their job. Awesome.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/0...ederal-database-allowing-him-to-buy-guns.html

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

Bingo. I don't for one minute believe that smart people on the American left actually believe more gun laws and restrictions will prevent occasional gun violence. The American left is just embarrassed that the United States has a Second Amendment to its Constitution and wants it whittled away.

 

[Medic007]

Bingo. I don't for one minute believe that smart people on the American left actually believe more gun laws and restrictions will prevent occasional gun violence. The American left is just embarrassed that the United States has a Second Amendment to its Constitution and wants it whittled away.

It has nothing to do with deaths or we'd hear daily condemnation of gang violence from the screechers like Raymond Mancow, Manchelle Obama, and whatever hairy Hollywood armpit they are worshipping today.

It's nothing but injecting an emotional ploy into the uninformed and unaware idiots that Democrats use these days to keep themselves in power. They don't realize that their simpleton bullshit has been figured out by their traditionally reliable voters, people with common sense.

 

[GL97]

Bingo. I don't for one minute believe that smart people on the American left actually believe more gun laws and restrictions will prevent occasional gun violence. The American left is just embarrassed that the United States has a Second Amendment to its Constitution and wants it whittled away.

No, what the left in America is embarrassed and sadden about is how there is a mass shooting all the time now (there isn't any such thing as "occasional gun violence"). Innocent Americans continue to die and nothing is done. Our President goes oversees and has to talk about another mass shooting in his press conference while most of the world looks on shaking their heads in confusion.

We are tired of this insanity and bewildered why some Americans aren't.

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

No, what the left in America is embarrassed and sadden about is how there is a mass shooting all the time now (there isn't any such thing as "occasional gun violence"). Innocent Americans continue to die and nothing is done. Our President goes oversees and has to talk about another mass shooting in his press conference while most of the world looks on shaking their heads in confusion.

We are tired of this insanity and bewildered why some Americans aren't.

You're bewildered alright. You're probably more bewildered that illegal drugs kill far more people in the United States each year.

 

[Medic007]

there isn't any such thing as "occasional gun violence").

You're correct. Chicago, and cities just like Chicago, are recording numerous deaths from gang violence in alarming numbers every damn year. Except lefties aren't alarmed because of politics. How sick is that shit?

You wait for a few to be killed in comparison to act like meth crazed monkeys. You haven't expressed a single concern for the victims of gang violence on here, except when people like me ram it up your ass, then it's to point out what you call a false narrative.

Pelosi 2.0, you're just a partisan Speak and Spell. Nobody gives a rat's ass what you think.

 

[JimmyBob]

I'm totally shocked the "bus drivers" failed to report it.

 

[GL97]

You're probably more bewildered that illegal drugs kill far more people in the United States each year.

And out come the deflections. Now, its drugs!

Like I posted, insanity.

 

[GL97]

You're correct. Chicago, and cities just like Chicago, are recording numerous deaths from gang violence in alarming numbers every damn year. Except lefties aren't alarmed because of politics. How sick is that shit?.

Leftists (and others) are alarmed about it and you have been provided evidence to refute this claim you continue to repeat.

I wonder, are you alarmed about it? Are you alarmed about the drug deaths? The deaths tied to poverty or just poverty in general? Or any other issue that is used to deflect away from talking about those killed by gun violence in this country?

Pelosi 2.0, you're just a partisan Speak and Spell.

I'm a partisan speak and spell? This coming from the poster who repeats/posts on here every talking point he reads on his right-wing websites is classic.

Go ahead, repeat that "Chicago" talking point again. That seems to be your favorite.

 

[OKSTATE1]

What is sad, even if they did report it, anyone doubt he would have acquired a gun illegally? I could be wrong, but if the guy was committed to dying for his cause which he was, I think there was no stopping him from getting a gun.

Bad crazy people are not going to behave like normal people and follow rules and laws. Laws try to control people, but that it is it. Laws do not create permanent change or guarantee prevention, some people will always break the law.

Thankfully an armed citizen confronted this killer, no one is mentioning the 2nd amendment worked in protecting the rest of the citizens in the area, there was another church just 2 miles away, he might have gone there next if he was not confronted by an armed citizen.

My wife traveled to the Texas/La border to visit our oldest daughter, she drove down after work on Friday, she was out in the middle of nowhere, an old petite women with MS. I was glad to know she had her conceal to carry and had the Glock loaded with hollow points, and that is she confident using the pistol and is accurate.

 

[twiza]

I have to give Trump credit for calling out the mental illness. This is a very serious issue and very complicated.

 

[JimmyBob]

I have to give Trump credit for calling out the mental illness. This is a very serious issue and very complicated.

Bingo. We always hear "if you see something, say something". That's all well and good, but howTF does law enforcement distinguish mental vs. unrelated (get off my lawn) behavior? Who's trained/qualified to make the call?

 

[Medic007]

Leftists (and others) are alarmed about it and you have been provided evidence to refute this claim you continue to repeat.

I wonder, are you alarmed about it? Are you alarmed about the drug deaths? The deaths tied to poverty or just poverty in general? Or any other issue that is used to deflect away from talking about those killed by gun violence in this country?



I'm a partisan speak and spell? This coming from the poster who repeats/posts on here every talking point he reads on his right-wing websites is classic.

Go ahead, repeat that "Chicago" talking point again. That seems to be your favorite.

Yet again, not a single reference to restricting arms ownership to members of a government sanctioned force. Why do I have to keep asking for something so simple?

Maybe you can get a refund on your tuition. Your lawyer skills suck. Is the Chicago murder rate not an issue? You act like it isn't. Is that because black people are the ones dying? Sounds pretty racist to me...

 

[wyomingosualum]

No, what the left in America is embarrassed and sadden about is how there is a mass shooting all the time now (there isn't any such thing as "occasional gun violence"). Innocent Americans continue to die and nothing is done. Our President goes oversees and has to talk about another mass shooting in his press conference while most of the world looks on shaking their heads in confusion.

We are tired of this insanity and bewildered why some Americans aren't.

I know. One person out of 300,000,000 plus people goes off his nut. Obviously, the answer is to severely restrict the 300,000,000 in our quest for societal perfection.

 

[GL97]

Is the Chicago murder rate not an issue?

I don't know, is it? You keep bringing it up. Are you alarmed about it? Do you want to help address the problems of inner cities? Are you alarmed about the drug deaths? The deaths tied to poverty or just poverty in general?

For one who demands answers from others, you sure have a hard time providing your own answers to questions.

 

[Medic007]

I don't know, is it? You keep bringing it up. Are you alarmed about it? Do you want to help address the problems of inner cities? Are you alarmed about the drug deaths? The deaths tied to poverty or just poverty in general?

For one who demands answers from others, you sure have a hard time providing your own answers to questions.

 

[GL97]

One person out of 300,000,000 plus people goes off his nut.

It isn't just one person or just one shooting. Come on man.

 

[wyomingosualum]

It isn't just one person or just one shooting. Come on man.

OK, OK, you’re right. What, then? 3 in 300,000,000 plus annually?

 

[GL97]

OK, OK, you’re right. What, then? 3 in 300,000,000 plus annually?

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data

 

[aix_xpert]

No, what the left in America is embarrassed and sadden about is how there is a mass shooting all the time now (there isn't any such thing as "occasional gun violence"). Innocent Americans continue to die and nothing is done. Our President goes oversees and has to talk about another mass shooting in his press conference while most of the world looks on shaking their heads in confusion.

We are tired of this insanity and bewildered why some Americans aren't.

Sorry, I'm bewildering, but I'm a big believer in what Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Gun ownership is an explicit Liberty provided to us by our forefathers, and unlike yourself, I'm not willing to sacrifice it.

Besides, if you are willing to throw this amendment to the wolves in order for safety, what about the others?

Will you come for the 4th amendment next? Just think, if the police state could search our homes at will, how much crime could be prevented. If you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about right?

Or maybe you'd throw out the first amendment, then we could outlaw Islam and really reduce the risk of spreading the ISIS message. That would make us safer, right?

 

[GL97]

Gun ownership is an explicit Liberty provided to us by our forefathers, and unlike yourself, I'm not willing to sacrifice it.

But it is not an unfettered liberty aix-xpert. As was noted on another thread, even the most conservative of Supreme Court Justices have noted this. Not to mention that no one is asking you to sacrifice it. We are simply asking for some reasonable gun control measures. That's it.

Besides, if you are willing to throw this amendment to the wolves in order for safety, what about the others?

Will you come for the 4th amendment next?

You realize the rights in the Fourth Amendment are not unfettered either, correct? As well as the First Amendment. They are constrained and restrained in differing ways.

It makes no sense (from a legal, historical, and common sense perspective) to take an absolutist position regarding the Second Amendment.

 

[wyomingosualum]

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data

So 4 seems to be the magic number to qualify as a “mass shooting”, correct? @syskatine is not going to like that because it blows up his Australian narrative.

If you’re going to say nothing more than 10 round magazines would help prevent mass shootings, then can’t we say 10 casualties would be a mass shooting?

In any event, if we accept the number 4, that brings the annual ratio of “mass shootings” to approximately 400 annually to our 330,000,000 or so population. So instead of my initial 0.0000000121212 chance of encountering a mass shooter, the chance now rises dramatically to 0.00000121212.

For comparison purposes, your annual odds of being struck by lightning are slightly greater at 0.000001429.

 

[aix_xpert]

But it is not an unfettered liberty aix-xpert. Not to mention that no one is asking you to sacrifice it. We are simply asking for some reasonable gun control measures.

You realize the rights in the Fourth Amendment are not unfettered either, correct? As well as the First Amendment. They are constrained and restrained in differing ways.

Yes, all of our amendments have limits and constraints. But in this case, Dems are asking to expand those constraints on the 2nd amendment when in reality, all we really need was for the existing laws and rules (constraints) to be followed. This isn't a case for expanding gun control, its a case of government (Air Force) failing to follow its own rules, and unfortunately because its the government, they can't be sued out of existence for their failure like what would have occurred if a private citizen or corporation had made the same failure.

Besides, one can also argue that this is a clear example of why we need the 2nd Amendment. While this maniac did what he did, he was stopped from making it even worse because another Texan fired back at him. As soon as his own life was threatened, he stopped shooting (hence the number of survivors), dropped his rifle (per the stories told) and fled.

 

[GL97]

So 4 seems to be the magic number to qualify as a “mass shooting”, correct?

I am speaking of gun violence in general and that site lists for you many examples of gun violence that have occurred this year along (whether one wants to classify them as mass shootings or not).

It shows how your whole "1 person in 300,000,000" or "3 people in 300,000,000" statements were completely wrong. Clearly, It is more than just one person engaging in gun violence in this country.

And btw, go quote your "statistic" to the family of the 18 month old killed in the Texas shooting. Or the family of the pregnant mother and three children who were killed. Or the families of those killed in Las Vegas, or the parents of the children killed in Newtown. Or just to the mother who will lose her child today to some random act of gun violence. Tell them it was just 1 person in 300,000,000 who killed their loved ones. See how that goes over.

 

[GL97]

Yes, all of our amendments have limits and constraints.

Exactly. So the whole "sacrificing of a liberty" talk is nothing but hyperbole and nonsense.

But in this case, Dems are asking to expand those constraints on the 2nd amendment when in reality, all we really need was for the existing laws and rules (constraints) to be followed.

It isn't just Democrats who support gun control. Most Americans support stricter gun laws.

With that said, I agree with you that we need to enforce existing laws and rules. But we also need some more put in place. Both need to happen.

Besides, one can also argue that this is a clear example of why we need the 2nd Amendment.

Just because someone shot back after the shooter was leaving the church doesn't take away from what actually happened and the real problem of gun violence in this country.

This isn't about whether we need the Second Amendment or not. As I posted before, there is no need for an absolutist position on this. This is simply about addressing gun violence in this country, putting in place more controls, and then enforcing all of those controls. It is about doing something rather than nothing.

 

[Medic007]

This is simply about addressing gun violence in this country, putting in place more controls, and then enforcing all of those controls.

The controls were already in place. The Air Force failed to do their job. He was able to purchase 4 firearms because of the failure to report his convictions, both of which would have prevented him from legally purchasing any firearms.

 

[aix_xpert]

Exactly. So the whole "sacrificing of a liberty" talk is nothing but hyperbole and nonsense.



It isn't just Democrats who support gun control. Most Americans support stricter gun laws.

With that said, I agree with you that we need to enforce existing laws and rules. But we also need some more put in place. Both need to happen.



Just because someone shot back after the shooter was leaving the church doesn't take away from what actually happened and the real problem of gun violence in this country.

This isn't about whether we need the Second Amendment or not. As I posted before, there is no need for an absolutist position on this. This is simply about addressing gun violence in this country, putting in place more controls, and then enforcing all of those controls. It is about doing something rather than nothing.

I'll take the absolutist position vs. the open-ended, let's do something perspective on adding constraints to our Liberties. So I'll disagree with you on that point. The government's attempt to do something rather than nothing generally end up causing more harm than good and unfortunately, there is never a roll-back plan.

If you have specific gun control constraints that you want to recommend, I'd be willing to judge them individually (as should be done any time someone wants to add a constraint to our Liberties). There are things I can even support. I support the banning of 'bump-stocks'. Don't believe that was related to this incident, but I'd support that legislation. But beyond that, I don't see any additional constraints that are needed above and beyond the enforcement (with consequence) of these existing constraints.

 

[imprimis]

The controls were already in place. The Air Force failed to do their job. He was able to purchase 4 firearms because of the failure to report his convictions, both of which would have prevented him from legally purchasing any firearms.

An input failure not an output failure.

 

[Medic007]

An input failure not an output failure.

I get that. I'm not ripping on the Air Force, but the Pentagon requires this stuff to be submitted to the FBI for the NCIC database. Had that been done, his background check would have been rejected. But of course he could have purchased from a private seller...

 

[wyomingosualum]

It shows how your whole "1 person in 300,000,000" or "3 people in 300,000,000" statements were completely wrong. Clearly, It is more than just one person engaging in gun violence in this country.

Indeed. The website you cited successfully moved the decimal point by two places. For comparison purposes, your annual odds of being struck by lightning are slightly greater at 0.000001429

Pretty comical that you cite a website containing mass shooting data and when it’s pointed out how minuscule the probability is, you change gears into “gun violence in general” mode.

Anyway, don’t let easily calculated facts get in the way of your hysteria. Embrace hysteria as you strive to achieve the unachievable.

 

[GL97]

I'll take the absolutist position vs. the open-ended, let's do something perspective on adding constraints to our Liberties.

I guess you can take that position if you want, but from the perspectives I listed above, such a position doesn't hold water.

If you have specific gun control constraints that you want to recommend,

I listed some on the other thread. You are welcome to take a look at that post.

 

[GL97]

Indeed. The website you cited successfully moved the decimal point by two places. For comparison purposes, your annual odds of being struck by lightning are slightly greater at 0.000001429

Look, you can flail around all you want but your original claim that somehow all these mass shootings and/or gun violence is limited to one person out of 300,000,000 is wrong.

It is also rather abhorrent that this is how you attempt to downplay what happened in Texas.

 

[imprimis]

I get that. I'm not ripping on the Air Force, but the Pentagon requires this stuff to be submitted to the FBI for the NCIC database. Had that been done, his background check would have been rejected. But of course he could have purchased from a private seller...

Understand. I put this in a similar category as not purging voter rolls of dead people when the Cert of Death is issued. Should be a routine computer data entry.

 

[aix_xpert]

I guess you can take that position if you want, but from the perspectives I listed above, such a position doesn't hold water.

Not sure I follow how the perspective of "everyone supports it" or that my take was only hyperbole and thus invalid show my position doesn't hold water. But I'll agree to disagree here. You are willing to add more controls carte blanche in order to buy a possible decrease in gun violence. I'm not. I'm willing to implement controls, but only if they apply common sense and are judged individually as to what we believe each control should accomplish.

I listed some on the other thread. You are welcome to take a look at that post.

Not sure what thread you are referring to. I didn't see any gun control threads in the top 15 or 20 current threads on the board.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

So 4 seems to be the magic number to qualify as a “mass shooting”, correct? @syskatine is not going to like that because it blows up his Australian narrative.

If you’re going to say nothing more than 10 round magazines would help prevent mass shootings, then can’t we say 10 casualties would be a mass shooting?

In any event, if we accept the number 4, that brings the annual ratio of “mass shootings” to approximately 400 annually to our 330,000,000 or so population. So instead of my initial 0.0000000121212 chance of encountering a mass shooter, the chance now rises dramatically to 0.00000121212.

For comparison purposes, your annual odds of being struck by lightning are slightly greater at 0.000001429.

I understand and appreciate on an intellectual level analyzing a meta data-driven approach. I encourage it. I also employ compassion and love for Brooke (left - 5), Emily (7 - right) who had their little guts sprayed across a church. Mommy was killed, too (far left).

It seems you're saying the numbers don't justify a change in the status quo. How many would? If your daughter was shot in the head while grocery shopping by a lunatic with an AR would you feel the same way?

Candidly, I'm so disgusted at:

1. The idea of giving a crazy idiot the power of life or instant death over dozens of good people,
2. The constant deception of the NRA crowd, and
3. the repeated, consistent, tragedies drawing, "Not now/ nothing's really wrong here/ it was a liberal // let's not do anything// it's a hoax" messaging,

that I've gone full circle to the point I'm exhausted at the constant defense of the mass shootings. Apathy + criticism of every solution + lying to prevent opinions from forming = functionally defending it.

Those percentages look insignificant. So does the number of Americans killed by radical islamic terrorism in the U.S. over the last two decades. So do the number of people killed by benzene poisoning, or the number of roofs that have collapsed and killed people. But we all think we should actively defeat the terrorists, want strict benzene regulations, and want codes to keep roofs from collapsing. Second, but the numbers aren't insignificant, particularly compared with the numbers from other contemporary western democracies. Third, I can't see much of a down side to fixing it. The dumbass had a killing machine. I don't think dumbasses should have easy access to killing machines. You do, I guess. Right? You just can't stand for dumbasses to lose their access to killing machines. No civilian on this board has spent more time hunting and shooting than me, and I can tell in .000012 seconds that an AR 15 is meant to kill people as efficiently and swiftly as possible.

 

[wyomingosualum]

Look, you can flail around all you want but your original claim that somehow all these mass shootings and/or gun violence is limited to one person out of 300,000,000 is wrong.

It is also rather abhorrent that this is how you attempt to downplay what happened in Texas.

Flailing? Dude! You supplied the data which, when analyzed, yields the minuscule probability of 0.000001212. Period. So please supply different data if you don’t like the statistical analysis and we can recalculate, hows that?

Meanwhile....HYSTERIA !!!!!!!

 

[Bitter Creek]

I blame confederate statues

 

[CBradSmith]

I understand and appreciate on an intellectual level analyzing a meta data-driven approach. I encourage it. I also employ compassion and love for Brooke (left - 5), Emily (7 - right) who had their little guts sprayed across a church. Mommy was killed, too (far left).

It seems you're saying the numbers don't justify a change in the status quo. How many would? If your daughter was shot in the head while grocery shopping by a lunatic with an AR would you feel the same way?

Candidly, I'm so disgusted at:

1. The idea of giving a crazy idiot the power of life or instant death over dozens of good people,
2. The constant deception of the NRA crowd, and
3. the repeated, consistent, tragedies drawing, "Not now/ nothing's really wrong here/ it was a liberal // let's not do anything// it's a hoax" messaging,

that I've gone full circle to the point I'm exhausted at the constant defense of the mass shootings. Apathy + criticism of every solution + lying to prevent opinions from forming = functionally defending it.

Those percentages look insignificant. So does the number of Americans killed by radical islamic terrorism in the U.S. over the last two decades. So do the number of people killed by benzene poisoning, or the number of roofs that have collapsed and killed people. But we all think we should actively defeat the terrorists, want strict benzene regulations, and want codes to keep roofs from collapsing. Second, but the numbers aren't insignificant, particularly compared with the numbers from other contemporary western democracies. Third, I can't see much of a down side to fixing it. The dumbass had a killing machine. I don't think dumbasses should have easy access to killing machines. You do, I guess. Right? You just can't stand for dumbasses to lose their access to killing machines. No civilian on this board has spent more time hunting and shooting than me, and I can tell in .000012 seconds that an AR 15 is meant to kill people as efficiently and swiftly as possible.

 

[wyomingosualum]

I understand and appreciate on an intellectual level analyzing a meta data-driven approach. I encourage it. I also employ compassion and love for Brooke (left - 5), Emily (7 - right) who had their little guts sprayed across a church. Mommy was killed, too (far left).

It seems you're saying the numbers don't justify a change in the status quo. How many would? If your daughter was shot in the head while grocery shopping by a lunatic with an AR would you feel the same way?

Candidly, I'm so disgusted at:

1. The idea of giving a crazy idiot the power of life or instant death over dozens of good people,
2. The constant deception of the NRA crowd, and
3. the repeated, consistent, tragedies drawing, "Not now/ nothing's really wrong here/ it was a liberal // let's not do anything// it's a hoax" messaging,

that I've gone full circle to the point I'm exhausted at the constant defense of the mass shootings. Apathy + criticism of every solution + lying to prevent opinions from forming = functionally defending it.

Those percentages look insignificant. So does the number of Americans killed by radical islamic terrorism in the U.S. over the last two decades. So do the number of people killed by benzene poisoning, or the number of roofs that have collapsed and killed people. But we all think we should actively defeat the terrorists, want strict benzene regulations, and want codes to keep roofs from collapsing. Second, but the numbers aren't insignificant, particularly compared with the numbers from other contemporary western democracies. Third, I can't see much of a down side to fixing it. The dumbass had a killing machine. I don't think dumbasses should have easy access to killing machines. You do, I guess. Right? You just can't stand for dumbasses to lose their access to killing machines. No civilian on this board has spent more time hunting and shooting than me, and I can tell in .000012 seconds that an AR 15 is meant to kill people as efficiently and swiftly as possible.

I was THIS CLOSE to including the same terrorism analogy that you just did. Ultimately, I decided against it because I wanted to keep the focus where it is.

My bottom line is that I don’t think you and your 30 guns should be penalized because of 0.000001212. It’s the same logic that applies when we take a drive in a vehicle or anything else that involves risk. When the probability that you’re going to be involved in a fatal accident is about the same as being struck by lightning, we all deem that miniscule risk as being acceptable.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

When the probability that you’re going to be involved in a fatal accident is about the same as being struck by lightning, we all deem that miniscule risk as being acceptable.

I get that the individuals don't matter to you. What number would be so high that you alter your position?

How are you penalized by not having a semi-auto weapon? Are you penalized by not having a grenade?