Behind Cruz's Florida Rampage, Obama's School-Leniency Policy

[Kilroy2]

Actually the state of Florida for having laws in place that allowed Cruz to get a gun as he was at least 18 was a bigger factor

That is why right after the shooting they quickly passed a law that they now had to be 21 to get a gun

After police called about Cruz numerous time while under 18, and yet nothing that was placed in a record that could be used in a background check to deny him a gun was a bigger factor

Obama, Duncan, Holder, Runcie, Israel, - none of them have the power to place a reason for denial in a gun background check as the check is very specific

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

You are also wrong about Obama, Duncan, Holder, Runcie, and Israel. All of them had the power to place a reason for denial in a gun background check. Their power was to not do what they did- cause background information to not be available.

Anything that prevents gun sellers, employers, etc, from knowing about criminal records, and non-criminal but bad behavior, needs to be abolished. If any promise programs still exist, that would be a good place to start
Clean house.

Lastly, there is no such thing as "the" check. Background checks come from dozens of various sources, and are variable from one checker to another, but all rely on initial information which the filthy five mentioned here, in one way or another, all participated to keep unavailable.

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

and you just contradicted yourself

you admit that background check was a factor

yet the things that count in a background check could only be things that the police , doctors, and the republican having a law that says a 18 year old can get a gun could be grounds for denying him a gun

The school or district has no authority to place information in a background check that would have denied him a gun

There are ten categories of persons who are not eligible to purchase or possess a firearm under federal law (Title 18, United States Code 922(g)(1)-(9), (n)). They are:

1. Convicted of a felony (or equivalent)
2. Fugitive from justice
3. Unlawful user or addicted to a controlled substance
4. Adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily committed to treatment
5. Illegal alien
6. Dishonorable discharge from the US Armed Forces
7. Renounced United States citizenship
8. Active protection order (restraining order, injunction for protection, etc.)
9. Convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
10. Under indictment or information for a felony

now of the above is in the jurisdiction of the school district they can not convict anyone of a crime nor can they diagnose hims as mentally defective


instead the police who were called numerous times about cruz but could not or did not even charge him with anything

thus because Florida law in 2017 and 2018 allowed an 19 year old to purchase a gun

now that law was changed that says you have to be 21.

too little to late

1. There may be 10 categories under federal law that can prevent someone from buying a gun. And there may be 1000 things can prevent someone from buying a gun, not included in federal law. Many of those things were present in Nicolas Cruz' case.

2. I don't know if your reason for continually bantering this subject, is that perhaps you're some kind of gun control freak, but however many reasons there may be to deny an 18-21 year old a gun, there are plenty of reasons to allow them as well.

How about the case of a law-abiding 18 year old girl with a small child at home, who are being menaced by a rejected suitor, who won't take no for an answer? Or how about if she's being bullied by the neighborhood boys, all looking for a quick "score" ?
These are just a few examples. In fact, the 18-21 age group might be the one that is most vulnerable, and in need of a self-defense weapon.

As long as their background hasn't been deleted, and their record is clear, I see no reason to deny them a gun.

3. I myself was legally given a gun at the age of 18. In the US Army.

4. Cruz' age isn't to blame for the Parkland mess. It's the ludicrous idea of not reporting things, and maintaimg false, good-appearing backgrounds, that is. This idiotic idea is incredibly dangerous, and needs to be eradicated wherever it might exist.

5. Are you somehow involved in this general promise program lunacy ? Got a vested interest ? I see no reason for an intelligent person to be talking the way you are, unless you're personally mixed up in this.

Still the repubs in Florida DID changed the law to 21

you should ask them if they have a vested interest

still at the tender age of 21 , you will have the rest of your life to get a gun.

whats the rush but Cruz age is the main reason but you seem to want to deny it and blame the School for not putting in jail or in an institution

You do not have a word to say about police involvement and why nothing was every done by them

All because they contradict your position

is your agenda more important that the lives that were lost ?

 

[protectionist]

Actually the state of Florida for having laws in place that allowed Cruz to get a gun as he was at least 18 was a bigger factor

That is why right after the shooting they quickly passed a law that they now had to be 21 to get a gun

After police called about Cruz numerous time while under 18, and yet nothing that was placed in a record that could be used in a background check to deny him a gun was a bigger factor

Obama, Duncan, Holder, Runcie, Israel, - none of them have the power to place a reason for denial in a gun background check as the check is very specific

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

You are also wrong about Obama, Duncan, Holder, Runcie, and Israel. All of them had the power to place a reason for denial in a gun background check. Their power was to not do what they did- cause background information to not be available.

Anything that prevents gun sellers, employers, etc, from knowing about criminal records, and non-criminal but bad behavior, needs to be abolished. If any promise programs still exist, that would be a good place to start
Clean house.

Lastly, there is no such thing as "the" check. Background checks come from dozens of various sources, and are variable from one checker to another, but all rely on initial information which the filthy five mentioned here, in one way or another, all participated to keep unavailable.

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

You contradicted yourself. Nothing being placed in Cruz' record that could be used in a background check, was not a bigger factor. It WAS the factor. The factor of criminal kids not being reported to police, and not having their backgrounds being reported to crime records.

and you just contradicted yourself

you admit that background check was a factor

yet the things that count in a background check could only be things that the police , doctors, and the republican having a law that says a 18 year old can get a gun could be grounds for denying him a gun

The school or district has no authority to place information in a background check that would have denied him a gun

There are ten categories of persons who are not eligible to purchase or possess a firearm under federal law (Title 18, United States Code 922(g)(1)-(9), (n)). They are:

1. Convicted of a felony (or equivalent)
2. Fugitive from justice
3. Unlawful user or addicted to a controlled substance
4. Adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily committed to treatment
5. Illegal alien
6. Dishonorable discharge from the US Armed Forces
7. Renounced United States citizenship
8. Active protection order (restraining order, injunction for protection, etc.)
9. Convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
10. Under indictment or information for a felony

now of the above is in the jurisdiction of the school district they can not convict anyone of a crime nor can they diagnose hims as mentally defective


instead the police who were called numerous times about cruz but could not or did not even charge him with anything

thus because Florida law in 2017 and 2018 allowed an 19 year old to purchase a gun

now that law was changed that says you have to be 21.

too little to late

1. There may be 10 categories under federal law that can prevent someone from buying a gun. And there may be 1000 things can prevent someone from buying a gun, not included in federal law. Many of those things were present in Nicolas Cruz' case.

2. I don't know if your reason for continually bantering this subject, is that perhaps you're some kind of gun control freak, but however many reasons there may be to deny an 18-21 year old a gun, there are plenty of reasons to allow them as well.

How about the case of a law-abiding 18 year old girl with a small child at home, who are being menaced by a rejected suitor, who won't take no for an answer? Or how about if she's being bullied by the neighborhood boys, all looking for a quick "score" ?
These are just a few examples. In fact, the 18-21 age group might be the one that is most vulnerable, and in need of a self-defense weapon.

As long as their background hasn't been deleted, and their record is clear, I see no reason to deny them a gun.

3. I myself was legally given a gun at the age of 18. In the US Army.

4. Cruz' age isn't to blame for the Parkland mess. It's the ludicrous idea of not reporting things, and maintaimg false, good-appearing backgrounds, that is. This idiotic idea is incredibly dangerous, and needs to be eradicated wherever it might exist.

5. Are you somehow involved in this general promise program lunacy ? Got a vested interest ? I see no reason for an intelligent person to be talking the way you are, unless you're personally mixed up in this.

Still the repubs in Florida DID changed the law to 21

you should ask them if they have a vested interest

still at the tender age of 21 , you will have the rest of your life to get a gun.

whats the rush but Cruz age is the main reason but you seem to want to deny it and blame the School for not putting in jail or in an institution

You do not have a word to say about police involvement and why nothing was every done by them

All because they contradict your position

is your agenda more important that the lives that were lost ?

I'm asking YOU, Kilroy. Do you have a vested interest ? Connected to promise programs, anywhere ? It does seem like it.

At the age of 21, you'll have rest of life to get a gun, IF there IS any rest of your life, and you're not killed because you didn't have gun to defend yourself.

Cruz age is not the problem. Not reporting his defects and crimes is.

I've said plenty about police. They haven't been involved because moronic promise programs don't allow kids' crimes to be reported to them, and screwball Sheriff's like Scott Israel went along with the crazy idea.

What seems to be more important to YOU than lost lives, is YOUR agenda, Mr Bullshit. I'm still wondering how you're mixed up in this atrocity.