http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18217741/site/newsweek/
It ought to be against the law to lie on a 4473........oh wait, it is!
It ought to be against the law to lie on a 4473........oh wait, it is!
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
Cho didnt buy the guns legally.
- Thread starter Pilgrim
- Start date
Last edited:
The only question I ask is... does anyone really think it matters if he bought them legally or not?
Even if they had stopped him from buying them legally due to better record keeping, does anyone honestly think that someone this sick and phsycotic wouldn't have found a way to obtaine them illegally?
I know this is somewhat good for current law abiding gun owners... but I fear what this will do for us down the road in having even deeper and more intrusive back round checks.
What next? Credit checks? Well obviously if you are poor, you simply want the gun to hold up liquor stores...
IDK.
They obviousely dropped the ball somewhere in the system. I don't think it is a "Loopoll" like the media is calling it but just further proof that the government is pathetic in near every aspect of record keeping.
Even if they had stopped him from buying them legally due to better record keeping, does anyone honestly think that someone this sick and phsycotic wouldn't have found a way to obtaine them illegally?
I know this is somewhat good for current law abiding gun owners... but I fear what this will do for us down the road in having even deeper and more intrusive back round checks.
What next? Credit checks? Well obviously if you are poor, you simply want the gun to hold up liquor stores...
IDK.
They obviousely dropped the ball somewhere in the system. I don't think it is a "Loopoll" like the media is calling it but just further proof that the government is pathetic in near every aspect of record keeping.
There are several ways to enter such an institution. I'm not sure if he ever was commited. One time it might have been a voluntary entry so no commitment there. The second time was for an evaluation which I thought I read was only for one day.
Court order detention order.
No different then when you fill out your LTC application and omit the fact that you were arrested at 15 for shoplifting but the charges were dropped and the case "sealed".
He lied on the app and that information should have been in the nic check IMO.
But not the point... does anyone really think that if he didnt pass the nic check, that he wouldn't have sought outher means? he had been planning this for some time Im betting.
I doubt that anybody, particularly the Brady Bunch, has complete and accurate information on this issue yet. According to one source that I read early on, immediately after the magistrate made his finding, Cho voluntarily entered a mental health facility, thus avoiding the involuntary committment that would have been a disqualifier. He also ducked the restraining order disqualifier twice when the petitioners declined to appear for the required hearings. If either of these had applied, then he would have had to violate a law in order to obtain the guns for his killing spree, which would surely have prevented their entire tragedy. ![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
Ken
Ken
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
I'll bet that if any of those students or faculty were CCW Cho's rampage would have been cut short and the scale of the tragedy diminished.
People who believe that a world where Bad Guys can't get guns are living in a dream world. It just isn't possible. The only realistic option is to allow the Good Guys to protect themselves in the face of an imminent mortal threat.
People who believe that a world where Bad Guys can't get guns are living in a dream world. It just isn't possible. The only realistic option is to allow the Good Guys to protect themselves in the face of an imminent mortal threat.
That was my first thought too - and I thought I was the only one.
Unfortunately, my CLEO doesn't allow me to CCW. Funny thing is, if Cho had applied for a Mass NR LTC, he would have been able to CCW in my home town, where I can't.
To the bradyites, I don't think whether cho got his guns legally or not
makes a shit pot of difference- they will still be going "guns are bad" forever
until either we win or they ban them all. They will still whine about
how whatever (bg check system(s) are in place arent strict enough, how
handguns are evil, etc, etc. There could be zero violent gun crime for
a year and they would still be whining years later. That crowd is out for
complete disarmament, and these kind of events are just extra fuel for their
little whining machines. They'd still be whining about banning handguns
if cho stole the pistol from a police officer and started killing people
with it- they would go so far as to say that "guns are dangerous even in
the hands of professionals" or some crap like that.
As I've said before, he would have just beaten the system, it's not that
hard. He also could have gone off on another destructive tangent and
tried to build some bombs or other deadly devices, or simply mowed down
classmates with a large motor vehicle.
-Mike
makes a shit pot of difference- they will still be going "guns are bad" forever
until either we win or they ban them all. They will still whine about
how whatever (bg check system(s) are in place arent strict enough, how
handguns are evil, etc, etc. There could be zero violent gun crime for
a year and they would still be whining years later. That crowd is out for
complete disarmament, and these kind of events are just extra fuel for their
little whining machines. They'd still be whining about banning handguns
if cho stole the pistol from a police officer and started killing people
with it- they would go so far as to say that "guns are dangerous even in
the hands of professionals" or some crap like that.
As I've said before, he would have just beaten the system, it's not that
hard. He also could have gone off on another destructive tangent and
tried to build some bombs or other deadly devices, or simply mowed down
classmates with a large motor vehicle.
-Mike
MaverickNH
NES Member
"George Burke, a spokesman for Democratic Rep. Carolyn McCarthy ... of New York, said millions of criminal and mental-health records are not accessible to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, mostly because state and local governments lack the money to submit the records." (from cayote33's posted source)
Just how many of those millions of people, representing by those millions of records, should be disqualified from having guns?
"People who cannot contain their urges to harm (or kill) people repeatedly for no apparent reason are assumed to suffer from some mental illness. However, they may be more cruel than crazy, they may be choosing not to control their urges, they know right from wrong, they know exactly what they're doing, and they are definitely NOT insane, at least according to the consensus of most scholars (Samenow 2004 [http://members.cox.net/samenow/)]. In such cases, they usually fall into one of three types that are typically considered aggravating circumstances in addition to their legal guilt -- antisocial personality disorder (APD), sociopath, or psychopath -- none of which are the same as insanity or psychosis. APD is the most common type, afflicting about 4% of the general population. Sociopaths are the second most common type, with the American Psychiatric Association estimating that 3% of all males in our society are sociopaths and Stout (2005) estimating 4% of the population. Psychopaths are rare, found in perhaps 1% of the population...the field of criminology tends to treat APD as so synonymous, in fact, with criminal behavior that practically all convicted criminals (65-75%) have it, with criminologists often referring to it as a "wastebasket" category."
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect16.htm
There you have it - 1-4% of the US population (3-12 million) might be denied guns. While only about 1% of the US population have CCW permits, a much larger percentage have guns - so we can't confuse CCW with the opportunity to buy/possess/use guns.
Of course, the experts will probably say that the desire for guns probably qualifies one as disqualified to have guns ... Catch 22.
Just how many of those millions of people, representing by those millions of records, should be disqualified from having guns?
"People who cannot contain their urges to harm (or kill) people repeatedly for no apparent reason are assumed to suffer from some mental illness. However, they may be more cruel than crazy, they may be choosing not to control their urges, they know right from wrong, they know exactly what they're doing, and they are definitely NOT insane, at least according to the consensus of most scholars (Samenow 2004 [http://members.cox.net/samenow/)]. In such cases, they usually fall into one of three types that are typically considered aggravating circumstances in addition to their legal guilt -- antisocial personality disorder (APD), sociopath, or psychopath -- none of which are the same as insanity or psychosis. APD is the most common type, afflicting about 4% of the general population. Sociopaths are the second most common type, with the American Psychiatric Association estimating that 3% of all males in our society are sociopaths and Stout (2005) estimating 4% of the population. Psychopaths are rare, found in perhaps 1% of the population...the field of criminology tends to treat APD as so synonymous, in fact, with criminal behavior that practically all convicted criminals (65-75%) have it, with criminologists often referring to it as a "wastebasket" category."
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect16.htm
There you have it - 1-4% of the US population (3-12 million) might be denied guns. While only about 1% of the US population have CCW permits, a much larger percentage have guns - so we can't confuse CCW with the opportunity to buy/possess/use guns.
Of course, the experts will probably say that the desire for guns probably qualifies one as disqualified to have guns ... Catch 22.
