Slashdot Mirror
Unresolved Login Issue Prevented Florida 'Concealed Weapon' Background Checks For Over a Year (tampabay.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the Tampa Bay Times
For more than a year, the state of Florida failed to conduct national background checks on tens of thousands of applications for concealed weapons permits, potentially allowing drug addicts or people with a mental illness to carry firearms in public... The employee in charge of the background checks could not log into the system, the investigator learned. The problem went unresolved until discovered by another worker in March 2017 -- meaning that for more than a year applications got approved without the required background check.
During that time, which coincided with the June 12, 2016 shooting at Pulse nightclub that left 50 dead, the state saw an unprecedented spike in applications for concealed weapons permits. There were 134,000 requests for permits in the fiscal year ending in June 2015. The next 12 months broke a record, 245,000 applications, which was topped again in 2017 when the department received 275,000 applications... There are now 1.8 million concealed weapon permit holders in Florida.
The employee with the login issue, who has since been fired, "told the Times she had been working in the mailroom when she was given oversight of the database in 2013. 'I didn't understand why I was put in charge of it.'"
During that time, which coincided with the June 12, 2016 shooting at Pulse nightclub that left 50 dead, the state saw an unprecedented spike in applications for concealed weapons permits. There were 134,000 requests for permits in the fiscal year ending in June 2015. The next 12 months broke a record, 245,000 applications, which was topped again in 2017 when the department received 275,000 applications... There are now 1.8 million concealed weapon permit holders in Florida.
The employee with the login issue, who has since been fired, "told the Times she had been working in the mailroom when she was given oversight of the database in 2013. 'I didn't understand why I was put in charge of it.'"
Since each state should be having their sales verified through this database, the FBI should be able to audit how many queries are made per state, to validate that they match the number of sales being made. If there is a significant discrepancy, then the state should be investigated for failure to follow procedure. This should be EASY to catch, and will help find the points where failures are occurring, like this.
All those concealed carry permits without background checks? It's an authoritarian's worst nightmare!
How many murders and shootings were committed by those unvetted CCW holders? I will guess zero.
of politicians and government. Once they pass them they for the most part don't care about whether they work, are effective, harmful, who gets hurt or are properly implemented by the government bureaucrats. They got their bullet point/talking point for campaign ads/tools to attack their political opponents and they just move on, problem solved.
;)
I also want to say again, about gun violence, what is it about our culture and society that creates individuals who think gun violence is a good way to get their fame on social media/solve their problems.
Maybe the real issue is not directly the gun (a tool) but the person and their state of mind along with our culture and society! Lets be open minded and at least ask the question.
Just my 2 cents
Employee is given a task, then doesn't do it, because cannot.
Boss doesn't find out for over a year that employee didn't do the assigned work.
My first thought is that it isn't really fair to fire the employee for that, but that really depends on whether she made clear to her boss she couldn't do the job. And why not give her the old job back, was she no good at that? If not, why give her oversight of this database? Do explain that one, please.
But the boss not finding out about it for over a year? Or the boss' boss? And so on? That's inexcusable. They're supposed to know that sort of thing, that's their job. So if any heads are to roll, I expect at least several levels of middle management to start sprouting vacancies. If not, the firing of managers shall continue until the idiocy stops.
Right up to the governor if necessary. Go on, have a full-blown election with only new candidates over the firing of an ex-mailroom clerk. Or what is this democracy thing for, anyway?
Since each state should be having their sales verified through this database, the FBI should be able to audit how many queries are made per state
IMO: When a successful background check is made; the national database should issue a Background verification control number which MUST be recorded by the states in their own databases and must also
appear stamped on a concealed carry permit; A permit without the correct control number is not valid. The control number can be looked up later and will match to the personal information that was used to query the background database.
If the background database info of that person changes later, for example an arrest or conviction is added, then the state will be sent a notification and be required to revoke the concealed carry permit.
The Dickey Amendment restricts only the CDC (e.g. not the entirety of the government), only restricts them from advocacy or promotion of gun control (e.g. not the study thereof), and only places that restriction on the specific portion of their funding earmarked for injury prevention and control (e.g. not their entire budget). Perhaps you should actually read the damn thing sometime?
Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong. But, if you choose to do that, be prepared to explain how they've actually been able to legally conduct such research (this from 2013) and even as recently as 2015.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I keep hearing about this supposed loophole, but all I see every time I go to a gun show is licensed dealers performing background checks as required by law and the odd exempt private party transfer (except in states where private parties are required to transfer through a dealer, in which case the background checks still happen) -- and private party transfers can occur anywhere, not just at gun shows. In fact, most gun shows don't allow private sales at all, so they're actually less likely to occur at gun shows than they are in a private residence.
The real loophole is what I like to call the "dark alley loophole", wherein stolen and/or smuggled guns are sold out of some guy's trunk in a dark alley. Not legal in the slightest, but it's where the guns used in the vast majority of crimes come from.
Nobody is using a weapon with their name on it to commit a crime, and nobody is willingly transferring a weapon with their name on it to someone else who may use it to commit a crime without ensuring that the transfer has been recorded. Too much liability.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Non-licensed gun dealers at gun shows would be illegal. Being a non-licensed gun dealer anywhere is illegal. Are you referring to private sales?
The pattern for everything I've looked at so far:
Guns and Ammo summary: X!!!!
nap.edu report (title: Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence): There are studies that say X, there are some that say not X, sometimes studies of X do not take into account Y. Further research is needed.
To pit it mildly, it looks like Guns and Ammo is omitting a lot of the context from the NAP report. It's almost like they have an agenda or something.
Yes, I'm referring to gun dealers who go to shows and claim to be "private sellers".
If you've ever been to a gun show, you've seen them. As a lifelong gun owner,, I've actually purchased guns from these characters.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Government staffing has issues. Who was this employee related to? Patronage lives at all levels of government.
Employee's story doesn't make sense, dates don't line up. Who was her supervisor? What's his/her version? Next supervisor up?
More to the point, why wasn't the system constructed in such a way that it is impossible for a bureaucrat to approve an application and issue a CCW permit without first completing a background check? That and the queue of angry NRA members waiting on their CCW licenses should provide a sufficient motivation to resolve any login issues post haste.
If you've ever been to a gun show, you've seen them. As a lifelong gun owner,, I've actually purchased guns from these characters.
So you're the one you've been warning us about for years? Huh
And you didn't turn in either the ones you thought were illegally dealing guns, or yourself? Huh.
So your years of complaints and invective on the matter boil down to, "Our system is soooo f-----d! Why the hell isn't anyone arresting me for what I did?"
It seems we've found something that you and the NRA agree on.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Funny, because for over 20 years, the CDC was prohibited from studying gun violence. Yes, the NRA has bought legislation that prevents any money the CDC gets from going into gun violence research.
So obviously the CDC did not conduct the research, because they're not allowed to. They're allowed to contract it out for no money, which basically means really self-interested researchers (i.e., industry) gets to write an opinion piece about it.
Your article is dated to 2013, and the CDC has not conducted any gun violence research since 1996 (Dickey Amendment).
And all my article states is the AMA is lobbying for its appeal since 2016, because one really cannot make any sort of judgements without proper research. Of course, the NRA opposes this, almost as if they're worried about the real truth, that it might be the next cigarettes, or leaded gasoline, or climate change, or something. Or it might be because their whole set of mottoes end up being lies...