Half a million felonious gunbuys were halted...
- Thread starter Jffal
- Start date
Jeff, we all know that there were _not_ 500,00 felons stopped from buying guns. Similar names, bureaucratic snafus, old warrants and other ideosyncrasies are the bulk of that 500K figure. Does anyone have a link to the percentages? In other words, is there a source for the truth?
Dick
Dick
A half million felonies, with the FBI rapidly alerted to the identity of the perpetrator, the crime, and the place of commission. If they feds can't successful prosecute more than 8 of a half million felonies when each wone is handed to them on a silver platter for trivially simple prosecution, they sure can't handle anything more complicated.
Derek Zeanah
New member
Heh.
I was blocked from buying under the Brady law once.
Got pulled over for a speeding violation, and figured that if they were going to take some of my scarce $$$ (was in college at the time) then they were going to have to justify it in court -- I took CA state debate championship (novice) the year prior so I figured it would be fun.
The weekend before the court date we got hit with a major snow/freezing rain storm, and there was solid ice on the ground all over campus (the night prior the wife and I picked up a retired colonel and his wife from the Dennys where they were planning on spending the night -- it was that bad). So I called the judge's number and got his secretary, and she told me not to worry about it, that the judge couldn't even come in that day because of the weather, so I'd be rescheduled anyway.
She was wrong.
They issued a bench-warrant for my no-show, and she denied ever having the conversation. <sigh> No big deal, just a bigger fine and something I'll have to explain on a grad school app one day.
Just so you know. Never knew I was a convicted felon before. <g>
------------------
I stand before Almighty God and I'll say what I have said for years. I will never again soil my responsibility as a voter by voting again for a candidate who turns their back on the fundamental principle of justice by which this nation's freedom lives or dies. --Alan Keyes, 2/2/2000
I was blocked from buying under the Brady law once.
Got pulled over for a speeding violation, and figured that if they were going to take some of my scarce $$$ (was in college at the time) then they were going to have to justify it in court -- I took CA state debate championship (novice) the year prior so I figured it would be fun.
The weekend before the court date we got hit with a major snow/freezing rain storm, and there was solid ice on the ground all over campus (the night prior the wife and I picked up a retired colonel and his wife from the Dennys where they were planning on spending the night -- it was that bad). So I called the judge's number and got his secretary, and she told me not to worry about it, that the judge couldn't even come in that day because of the weather, so I'd be rescheduled anyway.
She was wrong.
They issued a bench-warrant for my no-show, and she denied ever having the conversation. <sigh> No big deal, just a bigger fine and something I'll have to explain on a grad school app one day.
Just so you know. Never knew I was a convicted felon before. <g>
------------------
I stand before Almighty God and I'll say what I have said for years. I will never again soil my responsibility as a voter by voting again for a candidate who turns their back on the fundamental principle of justice by which this nation's freedom lives or dies. --Alan Keyes, 2/2/2000
I saw the same thing. I think enough people now know that these reports are bogus political bull that this particular claim, which has been used again and again over the years, is pretty well nuetralized in the public mind.
Its nice to see that whoever is doing the administration's co-ordinating on these matters cannot seem to come up with anything new. It did not get them anywhere in the past.
Its nice to see that whoever is doing the administration's co-ordinating on these matters cannot seem to come up with anything new. It did not get them anywhere in the past.
Byron Quick
Staff In Memoriam
There's another factor here folks that most of us overlook. Convicted felons trying to buy guns. OOOOH! Convicted of what though?
Rape, murder, burglary? Or victimless crime.
Or income tax evasion? Or even carrying without bureaucratic permission. Second offense carrying a pistol without permission is a felony in Georgia under some circumstances. There are a whole slew of felonies out there today that are crimes only in the minds of those who would be our masters. Think about it.
------------------
Byron Quick
Rape, murder, burglary? Or victimless crime.
Or income tax evasion? Or even carrying without bureaucratic permission. Second offense carrying a pistol without permission is a felony in Georgia under some circumstances. There are a whole slew of felonies out there today that are crimes only in the minds of those who would be our masters. Think about it.
------------------
Byron Quick
I don't have too much sympathy for people who commit felonies, regardless of their status of "victimless." The possible exception, there's allways one, would be for the rare case of someone having no idea that what they were doing was felonious. (Search long and hard for this exception- almost everyone knows what they're doing is a no-no when it comes to felonies.)
AP story - http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/article/0,2669,SAV-0006050029,FF.html
BACKGROUND CHECKS BLOCK 204,000 GUN SALES IN 1999
Associated Press
June 5, 2000
WASHINGTON -- Background checks blocked 204,000 of the more than 8.6 million prospective gun sales last year, according to a Justice Department report that shows state and local police rejected a higher percentage of would-be gun buyers than the FBI.
The 1999 figures brought the number of purchase rejections since the Brady Act instituted background checks in February 1994 to 536,000 out of almost 22.3 million applications, the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics reported. That confirmed earlier estimates of more than 500,000 rejections.
The bureau's report provided the first hard numbers on the differences between checks by state and local police and those by the FBI.
The FBI performed 4.5 million of the 8.6 million last year, compared with 4.1 million by state and local agencies.
The rejection rate among state and local agencies was 3 percent, compared with 1.8 percent for the FBI.
The report attributed this difference to state agencies' access to more detailed criminal history records than the FBI. In 1999, 73 percent of rejections were because would-be buyers had been convicted of or indicted on felony charges.
Last year, the report said, all state agencies had access to "computer databases that record past felony convictions, and many accessed databases with other disqualifying information such as fugitive status, court restraining orders, mental illness and domestic violence misdemeanor convictions."
The Clinton administration long has argued that the states are better equipped than the FBI to do background checks, but some states have not wanted to pay the costs. Twenty-six states handle some or all their checks.
The overall national rejection rate has remained at 2.4 percent since 1994, despite the Nov. 30, 1998, switch to computerized instant checks and the addition then of checks on long-gun purchasers. Only handgun buyers were checked before.
A second statistics bureau report largely recapped data already released by the Justice Department during its debate with the National Rifle Association over gun controls.
The gun owners' group opposed President Clinton's gun-control proposals and argued federal prosecutors were not enforcing existing gun laws. The administration said federal prosecutors were focusing on serious offenders and shifting smaller cases to state and local prosecutors and that combined gun prosecutions were up.
The report said preliminary 1999 data showed 6,728 defendants were charged with federal firearms offenses, up from 6,287 in 1998. It also showed that between 1992 and 1997 the number of federal firearms defendants decreased 19 percent, from 7,621 to 5,993.
The report attributed part of this decline to a 1995 Supreme Court decision limiting the ability to charge defendants with using a firearm during violent or drug offenses.
BACKGROUND CHECKS BLOCK 204,000 GUN SALES IN 1999
Associated Press
June 5, 2000
WASHINGTON -- Background checks blocked 204,000 of the more than 8.6 million prospective gun sales last year, according to a Justice Department report that shows state and local police rejected a higher percentage of would-be gun buyers than the FBI.
The 1999 figures brought the number of purchase rejections since the Brady Act instituted background checks in February 1994 to 536,000 out of almost 22.3 million applications, the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics reported. That confirmed earlier estimates of more than 500,000 rejections.
The bureau's report provided the first hard numbers on the differences between checks by state and local police and those by the FBI.
The FBI performed 4.5 million of the 8.6 million last year, compared with 4.1 million by state and local agencies.
The rejection rate among state and local agencies was 3 percent, compared with 1.8 percent for the FBI.
The report attributed this difference to state agencies' access to more detailed criminal history records than the FBI. In 1999, 73 percent of rejections were because would-be buyers had been convicted of or indicted on felony charges.
Last year, the report said, all state agencies had access to "computer databases that record past felony convictions, and many accessed databases with other disqualifying information such as fugitive status, court restraining orders, mental illness and domestic violence misdemeanor convictions."
The Clinton administration long has argued that the states are better equipped than the FBI to do background checks, but some states have not wanted to pay the costs. Twenty-six states handle some or all their checks.
The overall national rejection rate has remained at 2.4 percent since 1994, despite the Nov. 30, 1998, switch to computerized instant checks and the addition then of checks on long-gun purchasers. Only handgun buyers were checked before.
A second statistics bureau report largely recapped data already released by the Justice Department during its debate with the National Rifle Association over gun controls.
The gun owners' group opposed President Clinton's gun-control proposals and argued federal prosecutors were not enforcing existing gun laws. The administration said federal prosecutors were focusing on serious offenders and shifting smaller cases to state and local prosecutors and that combined gun prosecutions were up.
The report said preliminary 1999 data showed 6,728 defendants were charged with federal firearms offenses, up from 6,287 in 1998. It also showed that between 1992 and 1997 the number of federal firearms defendants decreased 19 percent, from 7,621 to 5,993.
The report attributed part of this decline to a 1995 Supreme Court decision limiting the ability to charge defendants with using a firearm during violent or drug offenses.
Note the spin in the story:
204k sales were blocked last year out of 8.6 mil. sales, BUT since feb 1994, a total of 536k were block out of 22.3 mil. sales. How could there have only been 13.7 mil. sales in about 5 years (about 2.7 mil. sales a year) and suddenly 8.6 mil. sales in 1999? what am I missing? I sure didn't purchase an extra 4 firearms last year! (though I wish I could have
)
Also, clinton wants the states to be responsible for background checks - but isn't the background check a federal requirement?
Another thing - they talk about 6,700 people charged with federal firearms violations - unfortunately, they don't mention that none (if any) of these were the result of the background check.
argh!!!!
204k sales were blocked last year out of 8.6 mil. sales, BUT since feb 1994, a total of 536k were block out of 22.3 mil. sales. How could there have only been 13.7 mil. sales in about 5 years (about 2.7 mil. sales a year) and suddenly 8.6 mil. sales in 1999? what am I missing? I sure didn't purchase an extra 4 firearms last year! (though I wish I could have
)Also, clinton wants the states to be responsible for background checks - but isn't the background check a federal requirement?
Another thing - they talk about 6,700 people charged with federal firearms violations - unfortunately, they don't mention that none (if any) of these were the result of the background check.
argh!!!!
cm: We got the same AP story in our local fascist rag her in St. Louis. They made the old story Front Page News!! Just barely got a picture of Clinton himself in there!
Something must be up in the Evil Empire, but who knows what it is. Things like this don't happen by accident here in St. Louis.
Something must be up in the Evil Empire, but who knows what it is. Things like this don't happen by accident here in St. Louis.
hoosierboy
New member
Didn't I read a case somewhere where they had a guy lie on his form about being a felon, he was turned down blah blah blah. Heres the kicker he cited the 5th ammendment of self incrimination, and got of because he self incriminated himself so the evidence was taken out and boom there goes the case.
Score one more for the criminals
------------------
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."
--Ayn Rand, in "The Nature of Government"
Score one more for the criminals
------------------
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."
--Ayn Rand, in "The Nature of Government"
I saw it too and was amused and irritated by the usual spin on the numbers...
------------------
"At last we shall reveal ourselves to the Gun-Grabbers, at last we shall have revenge at The TFL End of Summer Meet on August 12 & 13, 2000..."
------------------
"At last we shall reveal ourselves to the Gun-Grabbers, at last we shall have revenge at The TFL End of Summer Meet on August 12 & 13, 2000..."