Skip to comments.GAO: Only 12 of 13,000 Denied Gun Purchasers Were Prosecuted in FY '17
Posted on 09/11/2018 9:40:31 AM PDT by rktman
Individuals who are prohibited from purchasing firearms for any reason (mental health, criminal convictions, etc.) are rarely investigated or prosecuted when they do try to buy a weapon, a federal study has determined.
According to a report published by the the Government Accountability Office on Sept. 5:
In fiscal year 2017, "approximately 25.6 million firearm-related background checks were processed through the Federal Bureau of Investigations National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), and about 181,000 (about 1 percent) of the attempted purchases were denied because the background check revealed that the individual was prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal or state law."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
As a lag after obama there are still many people denied firearms for bogus reason.
BTW being denied isnt a crime unless you obtain a firearm illegally.
Well unless you lied on the 4473 as well. But, impeach Trump is the main focus of the day so there is that...... ;-)
Denying gun purchasers their second amendment recognized right to KABA is a clear infringement. My copy of the Constitution does not preclude freed felons or crazies from owning and carrying arms.
Anyone who can’t be trusted to be armed should not be running around loose.
Being denied is a crime, by the government against the citizen, depriving him of his rights recognized in the second amendment .
Agree totally! I have never supported this NRA tactic of enforcing current gun laws. Every federal gun law is unconstitutional. The 2nd Amendment could not be clearer in it's intent or it's verbiage.
And obtaining a firearm illegally should only mean stealing it.
so, it’s not possible that the purchaser doesn’t know he can’t buy a weapon ?
and why is mental health a reason for investigation\prosecution ?
Did you get your permit yet? LOL!
Many are not even aware they are ineligible to own a gun. So why would we expect large numbers to be investigated? They applied to purchase a gun and were denied. I would suspect that the ones who are investigated are ones who have tried multiple times over a short period of time.
DING! DING! DING!
We have a WINNER!!
Cases involving a domestic restraining order are especially problematic because claims of violence are often falsely made so as to get a restraining order. Not having been violent or threatened violence and with the preliminary order dissolved by the court at hearing, the poor sap innocently swears on the background check form that he is not the subject of a domestic violence restraining order.
Federal prosecutors correctly regard such cases as virtually impossible to win despite the severe terms of the background check law. The defense is usually able to demonstrate a lack of criminal intent by the applicant.
Permit? We don’ need no steenkin’ permit!
Many of these people are probably not even aware that they will fail the test.
#7. A person can illegally obtain a legal firearm if they use a “straw purchaser” for it, but the act itself is illegal and the purchaser is now a criminal for knowingly doing it.
As for the next commentor’s remarks about why should mental health be an issue, it is obvious. Some people are just plain weird to the point of being known as potentially dangerous.
While you have guys like Arthur Bremer and John Hinkley, lone psychos but without much prior notoriety as being a ‘dangerous wacko’, there are other people you know are going to explode into some act of violence. Their past behavior tells you this (and I’ve had to deal with one, which resulted in a combined FBI/local police operation that finally put his ass in jail).
The “old lady” on the block is not your threat. It is the guy who often openly is carrying a grudge way beyond its normal lifetime, or it could be the “weird loner” who suddenly goes off the deep end and either ends up as a mass murderer or a serial killer.
There is a fine line that law enforcement has to walk in trying to determine who is a “potential” or “real” threat, but if they don’t try, more people are going to be killed.
That is why “psychological profiling” is an useful tool as well as “behavioral profiling” (i.e., watching a person’s behavior on the streets and over time).
To do nothing is to invite more needless deaths and injuries. That is not acceptable.
There are a lot of crazy people out there just waiting to explode. A scientifically and lawfully based system of “awareness” factors is needed to try and address this very real threat.
Oooh, yeah; the Hillary/private server defense!
LOL! There are a LOT of folks I would prefer not have weapons, yet, there they are.
There are a lot of crazy people out there just waiting to explode.
And they should not be running around loose.
But a lefty psychologist or psychiatrist will abuse any law restraining crazies by declaring all permit applicants crazy for wanting (shudder) a GUN!
Not always. Sometimes, a defendant is genuinely not guilty.
Or was under the impression that something was (and should be) OK but the lying government changed the criteria or miss-read it.
I frequent gun stores. I know and work with owners, gunsmiths and salespeople. I see people who have had no problems buying Guns one year and then after the Kenyan got into Office all of a sudden the gummint reads the qualifications differently.
Dont be so happy to let creeps in government take over your life.
All that being said nothing in the constitution says a person who has paid his debt to society doesnt have the same rights as you or me.
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.