This was only a matter of time . . . Cities sue Defense Department over reporting to federal background check database
The cities of New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco are suing the Department of Defense for failing to consistently report convictions to a federal database that is checked before firearms purchases.
The lawsuit follows a mass shooting at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, by a lone gunman identified as 26-year-old Devin Patrick Kelley. Kelley’s 2012 court martial conviction for domestic assault while he was in the Air Force was not reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
What’s their motivation — never mind standing — for filing a suit over a crime that happened in Texas?
In court papers, the cities argue they are entitled to sue, since they “have governmental responsibilities, and conduct essential governmental activities that depend upon the integrity and completeness of the NICS.”
The cities are sure to argue that crimes have been committed in their jurisdictions by people who have legally purchased firearms because of the military’s failure to report their criminal records to the FBI’s NICS system. As The Hill reports, the reporting failures aren’t confined to the Air Force. In fact the records of the other branches of the service are far worse.
Earlier this month, the DOD inspector general reported that the Air Force failed to submit records in approximately 14 percent of its cases, the Navy and Marine Corps failed to submit records in 36 percent of cases and the Army neglected to submit records in 41 percent of cases.
For their part, the DOD is isn’t saying anything about the suit right now. They’re likely battening down the hatches, anticipating that more cities will jump on the bandwagon that New York, Philly and San Fran have gotten rolling.
When the states and the feds are battling in court, it’s like a gang war among rival cartels. You can’t hope for one or the other to win, just for maximum internecine warfare.
Well, good thing the guy was a damn good shot with that bolt gun. Also, the “fight” part of his fight-flight response was dominant. Definitely not a time for a person who’s first impulse is “run”.
Welcome to coastal hunting in Alaska. Almost everyone has a bear encounter, most aren’t quite so dramatic. Good work.
The irony being that these are, in the main, sanctuary cities that seem to believe that they are exempt from some Federal laws.
That’s exactly what I was going to say
People are still conflating succession vs the war:
Succession and the formation of the Confederacy was based on slavery.
Read the new state constitutions the Southern States wrote.
The civil war was waged to preserve the Union.
Read Lincoln’s own words both before and during the war.
Slavery was made an issue by the North when it looked like they might loose the war.
The start of the war, the firing on Fort Sumter in Charleston Bay, was due to manipulation by Lincoln, against the recommendation of his own War Department. He knew the hot heads on both side would react as they did and the South would get the bulk of the blame. He was a shred politician.
But most people are unaware of the details, are not interested in reading them, or just don’t have time to do so.
And an even bigger “But”…but the victors write the history books…it’s always slanted…can’t be helped, for it is written by people.
Plus we are looking at it through our eyes, with our biases, standards, morals, etc, – not those of the people of that time.
Their end game is prohibition and confiscation.
“You can’t’ keep them away from criminals.” plays out for or against, depending on whether non-criminals are also competent. If non-criminals are all incompetent and feckless, then prohibition and confiscation is a no-brainer. The sheeple can’t fight back, so take the dangerous tools away from everybody. If non-criminals are competent, and prudent then prohibition and confiscation is suicide. If we can protect ourselves, disarming leaves us at the mercy of the predators.
This conversation is hard to have, as there are two things going on: guns dangerous & people competent. Make a matrix with four quadrants, like consultants do.
Some of the anti’s see this end-game coming, while most of the rest are their usual useful idiots. For them all, this argument fits nicely with their intuitive sense that people are generally helpless and suck.
For the pro-gun folks, we need to emphasize prudence, responsibility, and good results. Examples of people taking care of themselves blow up the anti’s end game, and their anti-human sense of “Ewwww.” too. There’s a reason they memory hole successful DGUs, and play up the tacti-cool caricature.
This is all a consequentialist argument, which is the perspective they’ll take. Arguing human nature and natural rights is another perspective, that won’t convince the anti’s or the folks the other argument is aimed at. That makes a sting tag on the tail of the pro-gun conseqentialist argument.
Incarceration and execution both seem to be fairly effective deterrents. As soon as the incarceration ends, so does the deterrent effect.
Pre-Crime by Rutledge
Pre-crime aims to pre-empt ‘would-be-criminals’ and predict future crime. Although the term is borrowed from science fiction, the drive to predict and pre-empt crime is a present-day reality. This book critically explores this major twenty-first century development in crime and justice.
This first in-depth study of pre-crime defines and describes different types of pre-crime and compares it to traditional post-crime and crime risk approaches. It analyses the rationales that underpin pre-crime as a response to threats, particularly terrorism, and shows how it is spreading to other areas. It also underlines the historical continuities that prefigure the emergence of pre-crime, as well as exploring the new technologies and forms of surveillance that claim the ability to predict crime and identify future criminals. Through the use of examples and case studies it provides insights into how pre-crime generates the crimes it purports to counter, providing compelling evidence of the problems that arise when we act as if we know the future and aim to control it through punishing, disrupting or incapacitating those we predict might commit future crimes.
Are you sure we really want to go there? How about when the next BO or Hildabeast is elected President. How would you like it then?
Liberals will allow this but not “profiling”……hmmmm
Offending police chiefs should be personally responsible for the fines, not the taxpayers. That will get them sold pronto.
Maybe the definition of “night club” is different where I live, and maybe the laws are different as well, but isn’t it illegal to carry in places where alcohol is served (generally speaking) whether you’re drinking or not?
In Erie County, where Buffalo is located, there are still over 50,000 permit holders who have yet to recertify. Anyone want to take any bets that not all 50,000 make it before the deadlline? Even if 30,000 manage to do so in the next month, that leaves 20,000 people that police are going to be ordered to confiscate all firearms from. The town/village departments won’t do it, and Erie County Sheriff Tim Howard has instructed his deputies not to enforce the SAFE Act. So I guess the Troopers will be kicking in doors? I also can’t wait to see the lawsuits pile up when legal long guns are confiscated illegally by the police because someone didn’t realize they had to recertify a permit they’ve had for decades. It’s not that most people are willfully being disobedient, it’s that most don’t know they have to recertify. Imagine some guy with an old revolver on his permit, and he now loses his beloved 12 gauge and lever action rifle because of this. February 1st is going to be an interesting day. Something tells me the liberal, downstate tyrants running things in Albany didn’t quite think this one through.
When a democrat says that they respect the 2nd Amendment…what they are really saying is that they are absolute liars…
So they’ve designed a pistol for the anti-gun customer who will will never buy it?
Hell of a niche market…
Any chance that there’s a financial connection between this CEO and Bloomberg? No better way to usher in the mandated assimilation of these “smart” guns than to force law enforcement in NJ to adopt them. The anti gunners and perhaps congress will thereafter attempt to force others to adopt them, including federal LE agencies. It’s a dangerous road to embark down and I wouldn’t put it past Bloomberg to be involved on some level.