Charleston Shooter PASSED an FBI Background Check!

President Obama and the gun-grabbing left keep insisting we “need more comprehensive background checks” before people can buy a gun. Well, this week the head of the FBI came out and told the truth about the Charleston shooter and his gun. Due to an FBI “error” the shooter passed a background check.

Oops. This one probably wasn’t “close enough for government work.” James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director had this to say …

“We are all sick this happened. We wish we could turn back time. From this vantage point, everything seems obvious.”

Let’s be clear. The Obama administration and their gun-grabbing partners don’t care about more or better background checks. What they want is complete confiscation of all firearms – see Australia and England.

And the dirty little secret no gun-grabber will even whisper

Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent. Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent. Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Remember, “gun control” is not about “guns.” It’s about “control.” And, the 2nd Amendment is all about not allowing that to happen.

That’s why Progressives want to rewrite it.


p align=”center”>

Donald Trump Tells It Straight - Like It Or Not
Oregon Will Pay For Your 15-Year-Old Daughter to Become Your 15-Year-Old Son
  • jim_m

    Time to ban the FBI NICS office because they are racists.

  • Brucehenry

    Your links to your purported statistics go from Instapundit to “The Captains’s Journal” to Free Republic in a wingnut circle jerk without ever linking to an actual source. All mention the same “Australian Bureau of Criminology” but don’t link to any such site.

    I don’t want to say I don’t believe you, but I don’t believe you.

    • jim_m

      Because you are a fucking dumbass.

      What? Does Google not work on your computer? Or do you only read news from propaganda outlets like the NYT that constantly revise their articles to hide the truth and push the left wing agenda as they have this week with the Reddit/Ellen Pao story?

      • Brucehenry

        I believe the Roof story it’s the stats from Australia he can’t back up. AS I WROTE quite clearly.

        • jim_m

          I’ve responded relative to the stats in a separate comment

          • Brucehenry

            I’m reading the johnlott link now and it’s quite informative but nowhere so far have I come across confirmation, or even mention, of these alleged “Australian Bureau of Criminology” stats that Becker and Instapundit and Free Republic insist are there, they just don’t link to them.

            EDIT: Finished, but nope, nothing in there about violent crime having risen by 42% nope not one word.

            Nother EDIT: Forgive me but this guy also cites Ann Fucking Coulter as an authority ha ha.

          • jim_m

            There is an Australian Institute of Criminology. Again, apparently Google does not work in your network.

          • jim_m

            The Instapundit report just links to another blog, which links to another article that states “that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime”.

            Instapundit does not have any post that refers to an “Australian Bureau of Criminology”. It does, however, state this:

            “The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden
            University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second
            overall in violent crime among industrialized nations. Twenty-six
            percent of English citizens — roughly one-quarter of the population —
            have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more
            than 30 percent of its population victimized. The United States didn’t
            even make the ‘top 10′ list of industrialized nations whose citizens
            were victimized by crime.”

          • jim_m

            Neither I, nor Lott made the claim of 42%.

            Nor does he cite Coulter as an authority in anything, but cites her comments as relevant to the discussion, not as proof of anything.

            But apparently, when losing the argument on gun control, you resort to ad hom attacks because you cannot find any evidence to support taking the rights away from people.

            Ann Coulter was not cited as an authority, so you lie and claim that she was because anything you can do to attack the person and to discredit by association is what you will do. Pretty much the typical tactics of fascism.

          • jim_m

            Seriously, in one thread we have seen Bruce accuse others (Glenn Reynolds) of making phony citations where he does no such thing, and accuses John Lott of citing Ann Coulter as an authority on the subject when he clearly does not (as if a PhD with many publications on the subject would consider Coulter a peer).

            Dishonest argumentation, do a Google search and you may just find links to Bruce’s comments.

          • Brucehenry

            So you admit Becker made the phony citation then? Because I don’t care whether Coulter is cited “as an authority” or as someone who simply brought up an interesting topic, if you link to Coulter you reveal who your intended audience is. Nor do I much give a shit about gun control in the US — it ain’t gonna happen. I don’t wish to own a gun, but I don’t care if you own 10 as long as you don’t shoot me or mine with them.

            My point was that Becker made a claim of a 42% increase in violent crime in Australia and linked to a “Captain’s Journal” article as proof of that claim. That article claims the “Australian BUREAU of Criminology” is the source of the claim, and gives Instapundit as the hat tip for finding it. Then the story links to another wingnut website that cites the Australian Bureau of Criminology and links to Free Republic. NONE OF THOSE ARTICLES LINK TO THIS SUPPOSED “BUREAU.”

            Given Becker’s history of sourcing assertions from the International World Made Up Source Center, I thought I would mention that his link is to a wingnut circle jerk. When you jumped in with another source and claimed that it was “relevant to the stats” Becker asserted, I noted that it was not. It made other statistical claims that for all I know are true, but it didn’t support Becker’s 42% claim.

            I don’t claim Becker is lying, though. Becker is hopeless, a rube who will believe any made-up statistic, and take any idiot’s word, if he thinks it will support his weird bilious ideology. And so will you.

          • jim_m

            I may question the 42% figure, but it seems possible when you examine the other data available through Lott or the real Australian site I mentioned. Armed robberies more than doubled after the ban.

            I gave you a credible source that, while not making the same claims, provided credibly sourced data and analysis.

            I get that you hate Ann Coulter but the fact that you turn your brain off because someone you oppose says something is illustrative of how closed minded and blinkered by ideology you are.

          • Brucehenry

            Sure I’m closed-minded because I dismiss Ann Coulter but you’re not closed-minded when you dismiss the New York Times or Wikipedia or any number of sources that you’ve labeled “liberal.” LOL.

          • jim_m

            Dumbass. How many times have I posted links from the NYT? Or Wikipedia? The point is that my mind is open to these sources whereas your mind has closed. You live in a left wing echo chamber and you don’t allow in any other ideas because to allow competing thought, to challenge your ideas, would lead to your abandoning them and you know that to be true.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes I live in a left wing echo chamber that’s why I never visit sites like Wizbang or engage the commenters there.

            On the other hand YOU, when challenged to engage with liberal commenters at OTB, adopted a completely different persona, one of reasonableness and politeness, before giving up and heading home here, never to venture forth again.

          • Brucehenry

            “I may question the 42% figure, but it seems possible” says Jim.

            Exactly my point. It SEEMS possible to those who wish to believe it, so by all means let’s accept it as fact.

          • jim_m

            I haven’t argued for that figure. If you had bothered to read with comprehension you would have recognized that fact.

          • Brucehenry

            No you haven’t argued for that figure you just assert that it “seems possible.” LOL. Your whole reason for commenting on this thread has been to dispute my assertion that Becker is using suspect stats but you “haven’t argued for that figure.”

    • jim_m

      Here is a good article about Australian gun laws and crime:

      You will find it rather even handed. Armed robbery jumped significantly, not surprising when criminals had the impression that people would be unarmed, thus making it a “safer” crime to commit.

  • Paul Hooson

    I support gun rights and the 2nd Amendment, but the truth is when screwballs like Dylann Roof still can get guns it endangers gun rights on one level, but also disproves that gun legislation is as strict as some may claim on the other hand.

  • Commander_Chico

    You can bet there is a contractor rather than a federal employee responsible for the error. Maybe even a Filipino, Indian or Chinese.

    Federal Government is rotten with don’t-give-a-fuck contractors.

    • jim_m

      Count on Chico to make a racist statement like that.

      Count on Bruce to never call his boyfriend out on it.

      • Commander_Chico

        Like it is “racist” to note that the OPM data breach of security clearance information was caused by outsourcing to China.

        Get your head out of your ass. Are you really a genderqueer professor of critical race theory at Wellesley?

        • Brucehenry

          Jim is struggling with his identity.

          On the one hand, his Quest For The Golden Gotcha leads him to call Chico a racist because nationality is mentioned, even though he has always been a proponent of the He Who Smelt It Dealt It School.

          On the other hand his inner 8th grade schoolyard bully leads him to make homophobic references to “his boyfriend” — get it? Hur hur.

          Neither of these identity issues though are the cause of his inability to read simple English sentences. That’s a separate problem.

          • jim_m

            I knew you would suck up on the racist comment of your buddy. Substitute black for “Filipino, Indian or Chinese” and see if your mileage varies. Probably not because you are blind to the racism on your side.

          • Brucehenry

            See this is because these hypothetical contractors are from FOREIGN COUNTRIES, the Phillipines, India, or China, and subject to the laws of those countries and not ours. Another wrong turn in your Quest, alas.

          • Commander_Chico

            Yeah ‘black’ people are Americans.

        • jim_m

          You didn’t say anything about the OPM breach. You said that Filipinos, Indians and Chinese probably did it, inferring that they are untrustworthy and lazy as a race. If you substitute blacks in that sentence you would recognize it as a racist comment.

          • Commander_Chico

            Outsourcing essential government functions is untrustworthy. Sending them to foreigners is worse.

  • GarandFan

    There are multiple problems with NICS. Starting with the fact that it can take weeks or months before a state enters court convictions. Some states refuse to enter anything re: mental instability. It’s not just entering a name/DOB/SSAN and getting an all-encompassing answer. Crooks are known to use multiple names/DOBs/SSANs. If those aren’t already linked together you can miss them and okay a purchase. Then you have the problem of a recent arrest….whether it be for a felony or disqualifying misdemeanor. Those don’t show up in national databases. Each city/county maintains it’s own separate database and each would have to be addressed individually. Again, those databases have a delay before they are updated. There’s no way all those databases can be queried in the time allotted for the NICS response.