Two shootings in close succession, both by people that passed background checks even

[flamin lib]

though they were clearly in the prohibited class. How can this happen? How about this:

Congress Is Sitting on More Than $1 Billion That Could Improve Federal Gun Background Checks

http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/nics-background-check-congress-spending/

The NICS Improvement Amendment Act of 2008 was intended to improve lapses in state record keeping that have allowed dangerous people like Dylann Roof to get a gun. Here’s why almost 90 percent of that money has never been spent.
====
Congress agrees (that accurate access to local and state records is often inconsistent): Back in 2008, President George W. Bush signed a bill authorizing more than $1 billion in grants to improve local records reporting. What’s got Campbell confused is why — if there’s so much consensus around the idea that NICS would work better if states did a better job of reporting records to the FBI – almost none of the money authorized in 2008 has actually been released.
====
(Former Rep) James Moran had a more political explanation for the parsimoniousness. Back in 2007, the NRA publicly applauded the Act for its relief from disability provision and the fact that it barred federal fees for NICS checks. It looked like a non-controversial way to better enforce current laws. But Moran says the NRA then turned around and worked with allies in Congress to cut off funding for these grants when the appropriations committee put each year’s budget together.

“Everybody knew what was going on — the NRA never wanted any records kept,” says Moran. Keeping the background check system incomplete, Moran believes, allows the NRA to point to it as a failed system and rally against its expansion to private sales.

That's how things work in DC. Allocate lots of money for some popular project but fail to allocate those funds when the lobbyists find their way into the Appropriations Committee. The NRA and other lobbys like Big Pharma, petrochem and the like don't bother fighting bills up front because they know that instead of fighting 435 representatives they only have to buy off a handful of the 51 members of the Appropriations Committee.

I don't know what to do about it except re-take the House. Even that won't do any good unless the Gun Safety Lobby, which doesn't exist, can outspend the NRA/ILA that has so far spent ten times the money spent by all of the gun safety groups combined, including Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety.

Gunz is soooooo special.

[mikeysnot]

1. All the coverage of the asshole in Louisiana

all states that he bought it legally! He bought it legally from a pawnshop. That is a legal loophole, since he was denied on all his legal means of procurement.

No personal unregulated transfers of firearms would be a nice start.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

2. Pawnshops do background checks.

If they carry firearms, then they are federally licensed, and must do background checks.

However, I agree with you about personal unregulated transfers. Open up the NICS and require that all sales (whether from a dealer or an individual) be subject to a background check.

[mikeysnot]

3. Really?

Handgun bought legally
The Hi-Point .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol Houser used was legally purchased last year from a pawn shop in Phenix City, Alabama, Craft said.

It appears Houser was cleared to buy the gun because he didn't have any convictions for serious crimes, said Drew Griffin, CNN's senior investigative correspondent.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/25/us/louisiana-theater-shooting/

Restraining orders from family I guess does not qualify as serious crimes.... not to mention mental illness....

Wife was 'fearful of him'
Houser had a history of legal and mental problems. Seven years ago, his then-wife took out a restraining order against him, saying she was "fearful of him," police said.

The one-time political candidate from Columbus, Georgia, spent time that year getting treated for mental health issues. Last year, he was evicted from a house he owned in Phenix City, Alabama, and returned to vandalize the property, authorities there said.

The laws need to be revised, seriously.

[flamin lib]

5. Oops, reply to wrong post.

[valerief]

4. Most Americans don't have or want guns. We need a War on Guns. nt

[flamin lib]

6. Even those who own guns

want meaningful legislation that would curtail the gun violence. It's only a very small minority of gun nuts who live in a "from my cold dead hands" world that, with the help of the gun lobby prevent any workable legislation.

What bends me completely out of shape is the way even what seems like reasonable legislation is full of loopholes and technical exemptions that make it impossible to enforce.

The NRA is damn good at what they do.
Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people. Bullets shot from guns by people holding guns. The difference escapes me.

[Lizzie Poppet]

8. I certainly do.

I'm a gun owner and competitive shooter. I strongly support universal background checks, elimination of the "default transfer" when a background check takes too long (although there's no excuse for the NICS system to take that long), strict enforcement of laws against straw purchases, mandatory secure storage, and so forth. None of those things constitute "infringement" of the 2nd Amendment.

[flamin lib]

9. We have bumped heads elsewhere but like your response and hope to have more

pleasant responses.

So how do you feel about supporting EveryTown and/or MDA? They have an agenda that closely matches what you've said you you strongly support. Of course no agenda will be 100% perfect but will a 90/10 split be acceptable?

The Gun Control movement has morphed into a Gun Safety movement. Only a tiny fraction of the movement want to ban all guns (tho I've come to the conclusion that semi-auto with interchangeable magazines are a bad idea). Partly because we realize that a ban is impossible and frankly not desirable.

Think you can join us?

[Lizzie Poppet]

10. I've offered some of that sort of support here locally (Portland).

You may be familiar with Jenna Yuille, an activist who's associated with those groups (and the Brady Campaign). She spoke at a recent press conference on the Hill (Jenna's at about 4:40):

&feature=youtu.be

Jenna's a friend of mine, and I've often sported one of the "Gun Owner for Background Checks" shirts she had made, etc. Jenna's mom was shot dead at the Clackamas Town Center shooting here in Portland. Our state legislature just recently enacted a legal requirement for background checks on all firearms transfers here in Oregon, which I supported. I'd like to see private citizen access to the NICS database enabled (with appropriate data safeguards) so that there's less incentive to ignore the requirement, but this is a good step.

There is a huge amount of middle ground for the sides to compromise.

[flamin lib]

11. Thank you. In the event I've been dismissive of you elsewhere on DU or been downright mean

let me publicly apologize here. I look forward to more constructive exchanges and possibly some OPs here with you.

[Lizzie Poppet]

12. Likewise!

There's common ground, and that means the possibility of accomplishing something.

[DashOneBravo]

14. There is a lot of common ground maam

[DashOneBravo]

13. +1

[mwrguy]

7. total war

until they are gone.