They would have had better luck with SCMODS:
State, County, Municipal Offender Database System
Posted on 11/15/2017 11:51:49 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Despite California laws designed to keep firearms away from troubled people, this assailant still got his guns.
The red flags were flying all over the place.
Let’s review: crazy guy, history of wreaking violence on others, and multiple weapons at his disposal in a state with the toughest gun laws in the nation.
It doesn’t quite add up.
So what about that California law banning certain weapons from certain people who’ve had run-ins with authorities?
It’s called APPS for short, or the Armed and Prohibited Persons System, and it’s designed to allow California law-enforcement officials to automatically track firearm owners and proactively disarm convicted criminals, people with certain mental illnesses, and others deemed dangerous.
But as my colleague Robert Salonga and I wrote recently in this newspaper, APPS is far from a perfect remedy to get crazy people to give up their guns.
“The biggest challenge you have is a huge number of people who are not supposed to be in APPS,” said Craig DeLuz, spokesman for the Firearms Policy Coalition and the Calguns Foundation.
DeLuz and fellow advocates told us that a big problem with the system is that there’s no quick way to remove someone’s name from the system once their court-ordered weapon restriction ends.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Was he related to some local bigwig?
Why did he have guns??? Why the hell was he out of jail? Oh, that's right, Jerry Brown doesn't want to hold criminals in jail anymore.
California is stupid. Duh.
Let’s face it, the reason this guy had guns is that liberals don’t really care about preventing crimes like this. In fact, they thrive on such tragedies, since it gives them more fodder for their gun confiscation scam. The ugly truth is that the only confiscations they would ever even hazard would be from law abiding citizens. Criminals, like Neal, would get an automatic pass, as he and the rest of them now do when it comes to purchases.
What a bizarre article.
Describes a CA law for proactively disarming armed nutcases.
Spews at length about how every conceivable red flag was brought to police attention - shooting up his house with illegal weapons, violent assault arrests, etc - yet they did nothing.
Then makes a strange “other side of the issue” comment about how hard it is to get someone _off_ the “nutcase” list.
Then proudly goes on about how important it is for such “no armed nutcases” laws to be enacted, enforced, and expanded - right after making it abundantly clear they don’t, in practice, do a d@mnded thing.
I recall studies on where criminals got the guns they committed crimes with show only about 11% of them legally purchased them. Thus its already obvious more restrictions on legal purchases will not have much positive effect if any at all in stopping gun crime.
Why did this guy have guns?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Because gun laws don’t work?
This question is really getting old and stupid. If you live anywhere near a big city there are guns readily available to ANYBODY! Consider Chicago. As of today that city passed the 600 mark for shooting deaths this year. That doesn’t count people shot who were not killed. Of those shot and killed, how many of the shooters would you suppose were in legal possession of a firearm? Hmmmmm?
The truth is if a person is determined to go so far as to commit murder with a gun they will. Whether or not they pass a background check.
The problem with liberals / gun grabbers is that think they can just pass a law, set up a system, create a database and magically the problem will be solved. To them government is omniscient and omnipotent and can somehow keep criminals or the insane from ever getting ahold of guns with just the power of law, a piece of paper from a court, and a database.
All they would have to do is look at illegal drugs to see just how powerless the government really is. Drugs have been illegal to possess, manufacture or sell for decades. Yet I'm guessing that most of us could easily obtain them regardless of that fact.
So the crazies and the criminals are put in a "no-gun" database. Then the police attempt to "seize" their guns. Since crazies and criminals aren't exactly known for obeying the law, there is good chance they will either lie to authorities and say they don't own any guns or even hide their guns off premises so they aren't discovered if the police conduct a search. And even if the police succeed, the criminals can easily obtain replacements from dozens of sources (black market, straw purchase, theft, etc)
I’m sure if the government bans all guns, they will be just as successful of keeping them from flooding into the country as they were as keeping illegal booze out during prohibition.
Problem solved in 1968! So why didn’t it work!
“Today we begin to disarm the criminal and the careless and the insane. All of our people who are deeply concerned in this country about law and order should hail this day. “-LBJ upon signing the 1968 Gun Control Act into law.
Within two years they were screaming for gun bans.
I wondered about that too.
Reminds me of the only Bruce Springsteen song I like:
Highway Patrolman
Because Obama stuffed our military with Affirmative Action hires who were too busy taking their LGTBQ sensitivity training to bother entering a felony conviction into the instant check database.
And here in WA at a gun show my dad bought two 40rd mags for his Ruger .223.
They would have had better luck with SCMODS:
State, County, Municipal Offender Database System
“a big problem with the system is that there’s no quick way to remove someone’s name from the system once their court-ordered weapon restriction ends.”
Which is exactly the way liberals want it.
Registration always leads to confiscation.
“Was he related to some local bigwig?”
No, but this much is known about California Commies: Once the virtue signaling is done, they do very little follow-through. Just enough to keep something alive on paper.
This APPS system, unconstitutional as it is, was never properly implemented or subsequently funded.
There were a few very high-profile case of cops with a DA knocking on somebody’s door and asking if they could search for guns. Some idiots said yes.
It was bad press so almost all activity stopped before they ended up in court...to eventually lose.
He was out on bail when he was a proven danger to the community.
Bad on the Judge.
He was reported as a felon, firing a weapon and making threats to neighbors.
Bad on the cops for not investigating and arresting for felony violations, not requiring a complaint.
Bad on the Cops!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.