Biden’s FBI Announces that Certain Gun Purchases Will Be Delayed Starting Next Week

Reptile

NES Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
27,647
Likes
19,905
Feedback: 121 / 0 / 0
Biden’s corrupt FBI announced this week that certain gun purchases will be delayed starting next week.


According to reports, Biden’s FBI will delay the purchase of guns starting next week.

 
The concept of a juvenile record being erased upon reaching the age of majority is just plain dead - from LTC disqualification to "never be eligible for the NHL" to the ATF's de-facto announcement it will deny NICS based on juvenile records, the distinction now is that most newspapers will not reveal your name.

Any attorney who advises a juvenile defendant that the record cannot be used against them after reaching 21 is now committing legal malpractice and providing ineffective counsel.

Updated: The same goes for CWOF. Already treated as a predicate conviction for OUI purposes, as well as for commercial driving license purposes. There is no assurance that "CWOF is considered a DQ for firearms licensing" won't be added in the future, and I would expect the MA courts to admit it as "evidence of dangerousness" in a licensing suitability appeal.
 
Last edited:
The great red tide that he feared at midterms never came to fruition. Now he is brave and getting braver!

This infringement has actually been brought to you by these guys; Republicans all.

  • Roy Blunt, Missouri
  • Richard Burr, North Carolina
  • Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
  • Bill Cassidy. Louisiana
  • Susan Collins, Maine
  • John Cornyn, Texas
  • Joni Ernst, Iowa
  • Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
  • Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
  • Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
  • Rob Portman, Ohio
  • Mitt Romney, Utah
  • Thom Tillis, North Carolina
  • Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
  • Todd Young, Indiana

🐯
 
The concept of a juvenile record being erased upon reaching the age of majority is just plain dead - from LTC disqualification to "never be eligible for the NHL" to the ATF's de-facto announcement it will deny NICS based on juvenile records, the distinction now is that most newspapers will not reveal your name.

Any attorney who advises a juvenile defendant that the record cannot be used against them after reaching 21 is now committing legal malpractice and providing ineffective counsel.
My SoNH town is not big - 20k. Too big for the PD to know everyone and too small for massive IT infrastructure. But they maintain call logs in a database. Juvenile records that are otherwise expunged, sealed, etc., are one thing but those call logs are still available. When they do a yearly background check on me for our CERT, which the PD sponsors, they get pings in that call log from some calls regarding my mischievous son 5yr+ ago on our uniquely-spelled last name and home address. I had to have a chat with the Chief as I had declined to allow PD to talk with my son at home a few times and those call log notes were jamming me up on volunteer status. They added notes to smooth things out. There’s official and unofficial records…

The point being, “good moral character" for some background check purposes is a vague thing - maybe not a cause for LTC/PRL denials but certainly able to trigger a delayed background check for 18-20yr applicants, if the NICS process goes to local PD records. I don’t know the new process but figure it must be more than just a standard NICS run.
 
This infringement has actually been brought to you by these guys; Republicans all.

  • Roy Blunt, Missouri
  • Richard Burr, North Carolina
  • Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
  • Bill Cassidy. Louisiana
  • Susan Collins, Maine
  • John Cornyn, Texas
  • Joni Ernst, Iowa
  • Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
  • Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
  • Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
  • Rob Portman, Ohio
  • Mitt Romney, Utah
  • Thom Tillis, North Carolina
  • Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
  • Todd Young, Indiana

🐯
Check out this big pile of fresh donkey manure, courtesy of the antis in NJ
 

Attachments

  • 20221110_074026.jpg
    20221110_074026.jpg
    501.3 KB · Views: 61
This infringement has actually been brought to you by these guys; Republicans all.

  • Roy Blunt, Missouri
  • Richard Burr, North Carolina
  • Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
  • Bill Cassidy. Louisiana
  • Susan Collins, Maine
  • John Cornyn, Texas
  • Joni Ernst, Iowa
  • Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
  • Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
  • Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
  • Rob Portman, Ohio
  • Mitt Romney, Utah
  • Thom Tillis, North Carolina
  • Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
  • Todd Young, Indiana

🐯

The dems got them by tacking on an Obamacare era pharmacy clawback bill that would actually make prescription medication more affordable for the average person but every single time it's about to go into effect it's been repealed by congress, both dems and repubs have voted against it because having the current system is profitable for big pharma and PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers) and that translates into campaign dollars. So the dems can say 'we voted for gun control' and Mitch McConnell and the rest of these losers got nothing except proving they're in the back pocket of big pharma.

By the way, let me give you an example:

Your insurance has a 10% patient responsibility for prescription medication.
Doctor gives you a script, you fill it on CVS online by submitting the Dr Script
The prescription is handled not by CVS but a 3rd party (Caremark who is coincidentally also fully owned by CVS). They're the PBM.
When you're at the pharmacy and your cost is being determined, Caremark generate that number and sends it back to CVS on the register.
The pharmacy cashier at CVS says 'your responsibility is 29.99'
Meanwhile back at the PBM (caremark) buys the drug from Astra Zeneca (for example) for $249.99 but lists the prices at $299.99
The PBM has a $50 profit on the medication. You made a good faith payment assuming the medicine cost $299.99 when in fact it didn't
You should have paid: $24.99, but you overpaid by $5. So where does that $5 go?
It goes into the pocket of the PBM. It's your money, you overpaid for something that was bargained down to a lower price.

The clawback was to give that $5 back to the consumer at the time of purchase. Over the lifetime of refilling the prescription monthly over a one year period, you overpaid for the prescription by $60. That's your money that they are keeping.

Just thought everyone would like to know how they were double shafted by the GOP and dems in one single bill. Let that sink in a little.
 
This infringement has actually been brought to you by these guys; Republicans all.

  • Roy Blunt, Missouri
  • Richard Burr, North Carolina
  • Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
  • Bill Cassidy. Louisiana
  • Susan Collins, Maine
  • John Cornyn, Texas
  • Joni Ernst, Iowa
  • Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
  • Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
  • Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
  • Rob Portman, Ohio
  • Mitt Romney, Utah
  • Thom Tillis, North Carolina
  • Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
  • Todd Young, Indiana

🐯
The Usual Suspects

grey-rhinoceros-isolated-white-background_1308-87696.jpg
 
The point being, “good moral character" for some background check purposes is a vague thing - maybe not a cause for LTC/PRL denials but certainly able to trigger a delayed background check for 18-20yr applicants, if the NICS process goes to local PD records. I don’t know the new process but figure it must be more than just a standard NICS run.
I know that a history of alien abduction has been used as a disqualifier in MA, however, a belief that Jesus rose from the dead is not. Of the two, many (including myself) believe that both are unlikely but, given that, the former is more likely to be true.
 
This infringement has actually been brought to you by these guys; Republicans all.

  • Roy Blunt, Missouri
  • Richard Burr, North Carolina
  • Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
  • Bill Cassidy. Louisiana
  • Susan Collins, Maine
  • John Cornyn, Texas
  • Joni Ernst, Iowa
  • Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
  • Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
  • Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
  • Rob Portman, Ohio
  • Mitt Romney, Utah
  • Thom Tillis, North Carolina
  • Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
  • Todd Young, Indiana

🐯
Who needs enemies when you have "friends" like these?

When are people going to learn that no politician cares about their constituents. All of them have sociopathic personalities and only care about themselves, their donors and their inner circle. And, unless it is to fundraise, Republican politicians sure as hell DGAF about our gun rights.
 
Ideals get corrupted over time. Marty Meehan probably really supported term limits when he was campaigning, but got corrupted by the system once he got in and found power too attractive then decided they were not a good idea after all.
 
Ideals get corrupted over time. Marty Meehan probably really supported term limits when he was campaigning, but got corrupted by the system once he got in and found power too attractive then decided they were not a good idea after all.
If you can’t get term limits, take away their pensions. You’ll see a hack migration to lobbying work overnight. A few would stay just for the boner the “power” gives them.
 
You would think a person with a 2-year-or-less record would be on target for REDUCED background checks.
 
This is just wrong. Yeah it’s usually kids who shoot up the schools. But it’s a toll to take out the crowds.

There should be a background check in the first place you should either be in jail or free
 
This is just wrong. Yeah it’s usually kids who shoot up the schools. But it’s a toll to take out the crowds.

There should be a background check in the first place you should either be in jail or free
What do you mean? At face value this looks like it effects purchasers 18-20 years old and is specifically looking for mental health records and the like.

This won't hurt you or I, and if we are going to sit here and say school shooting is a mental health problem, maybe taking that age bracket of school shooters and giving them an extra mental health check hole to jump through isn't a bad thing.
 
What do you mean? At face value this looks like it effects purchasers 18-20 years old and is specifically looking for mental health records and the like.

This won't hurt you or I, and if we are going to sit here and say school shooting is a mental health problem, maybe taking that age bracket of school shooters and giving them an extra mental health check hole to jump through isn't a bad thing.
Sad that pro 2A people think this way.
 
Nobody can predict who will snap and do a nutty and who won't. If the FBI, ATF or any other agency thinks they can, they are sadly mistaken. I knew many folks who were compete a**h***s as kids, then grew up to become responsible adults.
 
Sure. Stop prescribing SSRIs to anyone under the age of 21.
So your solution is to increase the clinical instance of depression because 4 in 1000 adolescents on ssri's have increased suicidal ideation?

From a medical standpoint, this is counter intuitive.

Now that you have a bigger suicidal population, gun violence will go down?
 
Nobody can predict who will snap and do a nutty and who won't. If the FBI, ATF or any other agency thinks they can, they are sadly mistaken. I knew many folks who were compete a**h***s as kids, then grew up to become responsible adults.
I think what they want is to have the time to investigate better. I think the last 3 school shooters legally obtained firearms when they should have been prohibited.

The obvious answer is to fix the background check system so reportable events don't slip through the cracks. I don't know what you do about teens with violent histories and no filed charges, but something has to give there, mass school shootings (and Im talking aboit the sandy hooks and columbines) need to stop if we are going to continue to have the ability to own guns.

This isn't a perfect solution, but given a temporary solution like this or doing absolutely nothing, this seems the least intrusive for gun owners at a whole while attempting to protect children.
 
Last edited:
Nobody can predict who will snap and do a nutty and who won't. If the FBI, ATF or any other agency thinks they can, they are sadly mistaken. I knew many folks who were compete a**h***s as kids, then grew up to become responsible adults.

This pre-crime stuff is really the stuff of totalitarian regimes. Whether it's background checks as a sign of future behavior, stop and frisk, you name it. It's making a 'connect the dot' puzzle out of anyone no matter one's life experience.
 
What do you mean? At face value this looks like it effects purchasers 18-20 years old and is specifically looking for mental health records and the like.

This won't hurt you or I, and if we are going to sit here and say school shooting is a mental health problem, maybe taking that age bracket of school shooters and giving them an extra mental health check hole to jump through isn't a bad thing.

Do you have a better proposal for mental health and making sure that firearms aren't being sold to unstable school shooters right now?

Look it’s real simple freedom is dangerous. Once you start talking about charging people with pre-crime and limiting their rights… Half this country is on SSRIs, Likely another quarter take street drugs. Everybody has a mental problem and that’s not me projecting. So you’re telling me we can deny all kinds of people all kinds of rights in the hopes of stopping one random act of violence? I’d rather arm the teachers. Or we could fix our criminal justice system
 
So you’re telling me we can deny all kinds of people all kinds of rights in the hopes of stopping one random act of violence?
No, I very specially said that a delayed background check to further investigate the backgrounds of people 18-24 may not be a bad thing.

Such a pause would probably have stopped Parkland and Ulvade, two shooters who had significant history that had been ignored.

Nowhere have I said anything about denying anyone without a history of violence, nor have I stated all kinds of people- its clearly targeted at an age group and demographic that is prone to school shootings, not everyone.

If you bothered to read, the delay is to investigate juvenile adjudication information and/or mental health prohibition- as in, juveniles who are prohibited persons, but have not had their juvenile records reported to NICS.

This is pretty straight forward- you can't come out of 2 years forced incarceration for psychosis as an adult and buy a gun, you shouldn't be able to as a kid. Currently, juvenile records like that are falling though the cracks and it's what this is aiming to stop.

Eventually those records will be reported to NICS and the delays will stop.
 
So your solution is to increase the clinical instance of depression because 4 in 1000 adolescents on ssri's have increased suicidal ideation?

From a medical standpoint, this is counter intuitive.

Now that you have a bigger suicidal population, gun violence will go down?
As if SSRI's actually work. Go look that doozy up.
 
What do you mean? At face value this looks like it effects purchasers 18-20 years old and is specifically looking for mental health records and the like.

This won't hurt you or I, and if we are going to sit here and say school shooting is a mental health problem, maybe taking that age bracket of school shooters and giving them an extra mental health check hole to jump through isn't a bad thing.
So guilty until proven innocent, take the guns first ffs. we are our own worst enemies. Maybe look into the cause of the mental health problems
 
Back
Top Bottom