Romney Falsely Claims Colorado Gunman Obtained Weapons Illegally

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The FBI is pretty good with their profiling and intelligence gathering. They just need to be able to do their job.

Government officials do not have the hardware or the authority to collect and analyze the artillery receipts, health records and other data that could have signaled a threat was headed toward a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., last week, former federal officials said.

Nor do Americans have the stomach to grant the government such intrusive powers, they added.

Experts point to a review of the FBI’s handling of the 2009 Fort Hood, Texas massacre, which was released hours before the Colorado shooting. The report revealed the FBI did not have the technology to perform the kind of analytics that could have raised red flags about Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the psychiatrist charged with murdering 13 soldiers and civilians at the Army’s most populous military base in November 2009.

http://mashable.com/2012/07/23/fbi-track-online-gun-purchase/

[DaveE 178]

its about to get a lot less expensive for the authorities. once the obamacare database is set up, if someone's doctor prescribes them x,y, or z... firearm purchase denied.

It is not specific to Obamacare. The Obama administration has already done it. Last September the BATFE issued an open letter to all FFL holders. They are instructed to deny a firearms purchase if you possess a medical marijuana card, as you are a presumed drug user. The form 4473 has a specific question that asks if you are a user of illegal drugs; if you answer no, you have falsified a government document because marijuana use violates Federal law.

Open letter to FFL holders

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Government officials do not have the hardware or the authority to collect and analyze the artillery receipts, health records and other data that could have signaled a threat was headed toward a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., last week, former federal officials said.

Nor do Americans have the stomach to grant the government such intrusive powers, they added.

Experts point to a review of the FBI's handling of the 2009 Fort Hood, Texas massacre, which was released hours before the Colorado shooting. The report revealed the FBI did not have the technology to perform the kind of analytics that could have raised red flags about Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the psychiatrist charged with murdering 13 soldiers and civilians at the Army's most populous military base in November 2009.

http://mashable.com/...e-gun-purchase/

That's why we need laws that set up limitations and parameters for guns and ammo purchases. Domestic terrorism is a real threat and we should be directing our resources on monitoring behavior that fits a profile. We're not talking about monitoring someone who goes to the grocery to buy a gallon of milk, but someone who purchases a large quantity of ammo, for example, then check to see what other weapons purchases they've made recently. Heck, retailers already monitor consumer purchases - they do so for marketing reasons. Does that infringement on my privacy bother me? Sure, a bit. But I'm okay with law enforcement agencies monitoring certain purchases for the specific purpose of preventing domestic acts of terror like what happened in Aurora. If some guy goes to Home Depot and one day buys a sh!tload of fertilizer, I want the FBI to be alerted. If they find no other connecting behavior that would indicate the person is planning to commit an act of terror, then there's no harm. There's no reason why we can't do the same for gun and ammo purchases with the right legislation and a political will. But I'm not too hopeful because I know in this country, the gun lobby is just too powerful and thanks to Citizens United SCOTUS ruling, there's no limit to how much political power they can wield.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Commie Appeaser

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Removing the right for vote is in the process of being approved by the republicans with the voter ID law... Don't you read the news?

LOL more of your double talk in lieu of answering the question

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

See what I mean, rocks? Dozens of families' lives are forever changed because a terrorist was able to purchase 6,000 rounds of ammo without sending any type of alert to the FBI and Run-off-mouth-Hershey boy sticks to the gun lobby rhetoric like a tool.

You just can't absorb the truth. Those people did not die because that guy was able to buy ammunition. They died because he killed them. Did the 9-11 victims die because we have airplanes ? My heart hurts for the victims, but all your approach is going to do is stomp on my constitutional rights.

Here is a great idea. Let's make drugs illegal and spend millions of dollars per year to keep bad guys from getting and distributing them.. Opps that does not work either does it.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Why not let the law enforcement agencies intelligence help forge regulations that would help them keep tabs on whatever purchases they look for? The FBI has profiles and they know what kind of behavior to be watching. They just need to be allowed access to certain purchasing behavior.

So your advocating giving law enforcement agencies the right to profile people based on behavior and investigate them based on some observation. OMG you liberals basically have no core principals that guide you. That is the root of the problem and why you are soooo scary as a group. rights only matter if it's something you agree with.

So what your saying, is that since young black males account for about 84% of all violent crime in my area, our law enforcement agencies should be able to track their purchases and movements so they could be profiled ?/ I mean if it works for one group its good for another right ?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

That's why we need laws that set up limitations and parameters for guns and ammo purchases. Domestic terrorism is a real threat and we should be directing our resources on monitoring behavior that fits a profile. We're not talking about monitoring someone who goes to the grocery to buy a gallon of milk, but someone who purchases a large quantity of ammo, for example, then check to see what other weapons purchases they've made recently. Heck, retailers already monitor consumer purchases - they do so for marketing reasons. Does that infringement on my privacy bother me? Sure, a bit. But I'm okay with law enforcement agencies monitoring certain purchases for the specific purpose of preventing domestic acts of terror like what happened in Aurora. If some guy goes to Home Depot and one day buys a sh!tload of fertilizer, I want the FBI to be alerted. If they find no other connecting behavior that would indicate the person is planning to commit an act of terror, then there's no harm. There's no reason why we can't do the same for gun and ammo purchases with the right legislation and a political will. But I'm not too hopeful because I know in this country, the gun lobby is just too powerful and thanks to Citizens United SCOTUS ruling, there's no limit to how much political power they can wield.

Once again you are advocating profiling. So if guy goes to HD and buys a lot of fertilizer send the FBI to check him out. If he did nothing it's fine right ? So if I see a old Chevy Caprice with 20" wheels riding slowly around a wealthy suburb, it is ok if the police stop and check them out because they fit the profile ? I mean if the police find no issues then it's all good right ?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/

Chicago reaches 250 homicides for 2012

By Tracy Swartz posted June 27, 2012 at 12:00 a.m.

Chicago this week reached 250 homicides for 2012—the worst start to a year in nine years, a RedEye analysis of preliminary police data found.

The city has not reached the 250-homicide mark for the first half of the year since 2003, which saw 286 homicides for the first half of the year and 601 homicides for the entire year, according to a 2009 Chicago Police Department report.

Homicides this year are up 36 percent compared to the same period last year, as of Wednesday afternoon, according to RedEye data.

Fancy Pants may be right. Think of all the deaths profiling could prevent here.

[natty bumppo 297]

1343443225[/url]' post='5562645']

What type of alerts would be necessary? We've already determined his purchases were not all that unusual. I think the oddest purchase was probably the body armor.

The focus on the ammo purchase is interesting. So he bought 6000 rounds. How much ammo did he carry in the commission of the crime? A few hundred? It only takes 1 round of ammo to cause injury. With all the hype about the ammo that was left at home, there is little attention given to the explosives rigged to blow.

Someone wants to record ammo purchases. Guess they feel it is okay to have government databases which are basically open to the public listing the contents of a private residence.

Eta: Yes is see the quote thing. The iPad just did it and I ain't gonna change it ... So the quote police will just have to deal

Edited July 28, 2012 by natty bumppo

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The FBI is pretty good with their profiling and intelligence gathering. They just need to be able to do their job.

Yes, Edgar had no problem locating and stopping all the sixties radicals before they killed judges and robbed banks, or ran through the Hollywood hills on a murder spree.

[rocks 494]

That's why we need laws that set up limitations and parameters for guns and ammo purchases. Domestic terrorism is a real threat and we should be directing our resources on monitoring behavior that fits a profile. We're not talking about monitoring someone who goes to the grocery to buy a gallon of milk, but someone who purchases a large quantity of ammo, for example, then check to see what other weapons purchases they've made recently. Heck, retailers already monitor consumer purchases - they do so for marketing reasons. Does that infringement on my privacy bother me? Sure, a bit. But I'm okay with law enforcement agencies monitoring certain purchases for the specific purpose of preventing domestic acts of terror like what happened in Aurora. If some guy goes to Home Depot and one day buys a sh!tload of fertilizer, I want the FBI to be alerted. If they find no other connecting behavior that would indicate the person is planning to commit an act of terror, then there's no harm. There's no reason why we can't do the same for gun and ammo purchases with the right legislation and a political will. But I'm not too hopeful because I know in this country, the gun lobby is just too powerful and thanks to Citizens United SCOTUS ruling, there's no limit to how much political power they can wield.

Love the name change. I'm also a commie because I'm not extreme right, it's not the first time I've been called that on here either.

Unfortunately, as you know, you're wasting your time trying to reason with the extreme right.

[SMOKE 1,426]

It is not specific to Obamacare. The Obama administration has already done it. Last September the BATFE issued an open letter to all FFL holders. They are instructed to deny a firearms purchase if you possess a medical marijuana card, as you are a presumed drug user. The form 4473 has a specific question that asks if you are a user of illegal drugs; if you answer no, you have falsified a government document because marijuana use violates Federal law.

Open letter to FFL holders

i heard about that. i expect antidepressants and all other psych drugs to be added soon.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Love the name change. I'm also a commie because I'm not extreme right, it's not the first time I've been called that on here either.

Unfortunately, as you know, you're wasting your time trying to reason with the extreme right.

lol I called you comrade because you want to dictate that people should only have things they need, not want. I've also been called a Liberal on this forum at least a half dozen times.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

That's why we need laws that set up limitations and parameters for guns and ammo purchases. Domestic terrorism is a real threat and we should be directing our resources on monitoring behavior that fits a profile. We're not talking about monitoring someone who goes to the grocery to buy a gallon of milk, but someone who purchases a large quantity of ammo, for example, then check to see what other weapons purchases they've made recently. Heck, retailers already monitor consumer purchases - they do so for marketing reasons. Does that infringement on my privacy bother me? Sure, a bit. But I'm okay with law enforcement agencies monitoring certain purchases for the specific purpose of preventing domestic acts of terror like what happened in Aurora. If some guy goes to Home Depot and one day buys a sh!tload of fertilizer, I want the FBI to be alerted. If they find no other connecting behavior that would indicate the person is planning to commit an act of terror, then there's no harm. There's no reason why we can't do the same for gun and ammo purchases with the right legislation and a political will. But I'm not too hopeful because I know in this country, the gun lobby is just too powerful and thanks to Citizens United SCOTUS ruling, there's no limit to how much political power they can wield.

Okay so we restrict purchases since the FBI can't handle profiling purchases. Based on what happened, .223 purchases would have to be limited to 50 rounds, .40 to like 20, and 8 shells.

Thats not going to happen.

[rocks 494]

lol I called you comrade because you want to dictate that people should only have things they need, not want. I've also been called a Liberal on this forum at least a half dozen times.

You didn't call me "liberal", you called me a communist. They're two very different things.

It's OK, I have a tough skin.