Page 5 of 5
Re: Man Shoots Up Church
Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 9:27 pm
by cashman966
Klingon00 wrote:DontTreadOnMe wrote:
According to the latest information
he bought the gun himself, in which case I'm confused about the timing and how he passed a NICS check (SC does use NICS, NC doesn't) since the Feb 28 felony arrest precedes his 21st birthday (given as sometime in April).
Yes, I'm interested in the timing as well. The father/grandfather better hope there's no
paper trail that might show he gave him money expressly to purchase a handgun. I'm almost wondering if the change in story isn't a CYA by the grandfather. It would appear that either way, the kid was under disability and illegally obtained his firearms and no amount of new background check laws would have prevented it.
The most recent story I read now says that it was a misdemeanor drug charge not a felony. The only charge I can find on the court's site is the trespass conviction, the drug charge may not have been scheduled for trial yet.
Dylann Roof Has a Criminal Record
Roof was arrested on a misdemeanor drug possession charge, and his Hyundai, the same car he was arrested in after the church shooting, was towed from the parking lot.
Despite being told to stay away from the mall, Roof was arrested there again on April 26 and charged with trespassing. After that, he was banned from the mall for three years.
From what I can tell from the
SC Code of Laws Simple possession of a schedule III drug is a misdemeanor under SECTION 44-53-370 (d)(2) punishable by up to 6 month in jail.
Re: Man Shoots Up Church
Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:25 am
by bignflnut
"
South Carolina does not have a hate crimes law," says the Times, "and federal investigators believe that a murder case alone would leave the racial component of the crime unaddressed." It's not enough, in other words, for the government to say Dylann Roof was wrong to murder nine innocent people—so wrong that his own life may be forfeit. The government also must say he was wrong to believe the things he be did about black people. So if you think ideological policing is a proper role for government, you should welcome a federal prosecution of Roof. But if you think the criminal law should deal with defendants' right-violating actions rather than their reprehensible beliefs, you should be satisfied with the justice Roof gets in South Carolina's courts.
Re: Man Shoots Up Church
Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2015 10:54 am
by Six Shooter
Re: Man Shoots Up Church
Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:43 pm
by Bruenor
Judge dismisses suit over faulty background check that allowed killer to purchase firearm
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/20/su ... oting.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel also blasted the federal government for what he called its "abysmally poor policy choices" in how it runs the national database for firearm background checks.
"The record reveals that the FBI's background check system is disturbingly superficial, excessively micromanaged by rigid standard operating procedures, and obstructed by policies that deny the overworked and overburdened examiners access to the most comprehensive law enforcement federal database," Gergel wrote in the ruling Monday.
The FBI has acknowledged that a 2015 drug charge should have prevented Roof from buying the gun, according to court documents. However, clerical errors by local law enforcement impeded the background check and federal procedures limited other commonsense ways the examiner could have completed the research, Gergel wrote.
Because the examiner followed agency procedures, the judge had to dismiss the lawsuit by massacre survivors and grieving families.
