Marysville Mt Pilchuck shooting

[joao01]

Can any FFLs comment if the handgun background check process is different for a tribal member?

I assumed anyone buying a handgun at a dealer, the check goes via the state POC who checks state and local records, and NICS.
The failure here is state or local/tribal, not at NICS. (although NICS should have flagged it too, so clearly the info wasn't sent to them either, but if you read documents on the BJS site, the state/local records are always considered a superset of NICS for records from that state)

It doesn't prove background checks are a bad idea. It proves what we already knew, that they are not 100% perfect.

Unless Jesus or Santa Clause do BGCs they will never be perfect


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pablo]

Can any FFLs comment if the handgun background check process is different for a tribal member?

I assumed anyone buying a handgun at a dealer, the check goes via the state POC who checks state and local records, and NICS.
The failure here is state or local/tribal, not at NICS. (although NICS should have flagged it too, so clearly the info wasn't sent to them either, but if you read documents on the BJS site, the state/local records are always considered a superset of NICS for records from that state)

It doesn't prove background checks are a bad idea. It proves what we already knew, that they are not 100% perfect.

It proves they are so imperfect the innocent should not be penalized.

[joao01]

It proves they are so imperfect the innocent should not be penalized.

[Captain90s]

Can any FFLs comment if the handgun background check process is different for a tribal member?

I assumed anyone buying a handgun at a dealer, the check goes via the state POC who checks state and local records, and NICS.
The failure here is state or local/tribal, not at NICS. (although NICS should have flagged it too, so clearly the info wasn't sent to them either, but if you read documents on the BJS site, the state/local records are always considered a superset of NICS for records from that state)

It doesn't prove background checks are a bad idea. It proves what we already knew, that they are not 100% perfect.

It proves they are so imperfect the innocent should not be penalized.

This. What this proves is that we needed to IMPROVE AND ENFORCE the laws we already have, which SHOULD have stopped this gun transfer, rather than create an entirely new law that, surprise surprise, does more to harm LAC than it does the criminals.

[deadshot2]

Some Tribes have cliques, with essentially an elite family or a number of elite families within each Tribe that do have a fair amount influence within the Tribe. I believe this family was one such example.

There are about 5 "Surnames" that make up the Tulalip tribe.

Fryborg, Hatch, Williams, Moses, and Gobin just about it. Everyone is either carrying that last name or are related through marriage.

It's not only a Soverign Nation, it's an Inbred Nation.

The Tulalip Tribe seems to "Own" the local press. The Everett Herald will publish stories like this because they come in on the Associated Press wire but if you want to comment on the article(s), good luck. The Herald closes the comments from the beginning because someone from that "list of five" doesn't want their dirty secrets aired.

If the Tribe wants to run it's own court then they should be reporting cases like this to NICS. If they had there may well have been no shooting at MPHS that day.

The good news is that the Feds are handling this case and he may well end up in prison for 10 years. Let the Tribe figure out how to cover that up.

[deadshot2]

Can any FFLs comment if the handgun background check process is different for a tribal member?

I assumed anyone buying a handgun at a dealer, the check goes via the state POC who checks state and local records, and NICS.
The failure here is state or local/tribal, not at NICS. (although NICS should have flagged it too, so clearly the info wasn't sent to them either, but if you read documents on the BJS site, the state/local records are always considered a superset of NICS for records from that state)

It doesn't prove background checks are a bad idea. It proves what we already knew, that they are not 100% perfect.

There's no difference. Indians have to follow Federal Law which requires the Background Check. The failure here was that his restraining order and probation violation weren't reported. No report, no flag in the NICS system.

I-594 didn't contribute a single thing. This was just another case of a prohibited person getting a firearm in spite of the existing laws. He lied on the 4473 plain and simple and because the Tribe was either arrogant or lazy, failing to report to the Sheriff's office which inputs these situations to NICS, the whole mess failed.

The real CURE is to send this a-hole off to prison for a long time. Both to send a message to those that would try to obtain firearms illegally, but to the tribe as well letting them know that they're still subject to "the white man's law".

I'd love to see the families of students that were traumatized by this shooting sue the crap out of the tribe. If they want to play the soverign nation game, then just sue them in The Hague.

[skey]

The good news is that the Feds are handling this case and he may well end up in prison for 10 years. Let the Tribe figure out how to cover that up.

Hopefully on each count as it should be.

[Schoolboy]

I'll push this one step farther, the person who "dropped the ball" on his paperwork should be fired, all benifits pulled, and charged as an accomplice.

Thoughts?

[mislabeled]

But was the ball really dropped? If tribes aren't required to submit records to either the state or the federal databases, then did anyone really screw up or is the system just more porous than people want to believe it is?

[deadshot2]

But was the ball really dropped? If tribes aren't required to submit records to either the state or the federal databases, then did anyone really screw up or is the system just more porous than people want to believe it is?

Considering that the tribes want to run their own criminal courts and also have all the rights and privileges of the rest of us they should take the necessary steps to protect everyone. The fact that they failed to report this individuals disqualification from firearm ownership or possession is a very large ball that got dropped.

If they won't play by the rules we all have to follow then cut off all sales of firearms to tribal members (that don't still fall under state court jurisdiction).

This is one area where the Fed's should step in and kick some ass. Regardless of their Sovereign Nation status the tribes are all subject to Federal Law with federal officers having full enforcement rights.

[Louddog]

Tulalip tribe is very racist against white folk and their ways. I'd not be shocked if it's just standard procedure that they turn nothing over to the feds because they do not want the feds involved in their business.

[ANZAC]

But was the ball really dropped? If tribes aren't required to submit records to either the state or the federal databases, then did anyone really screw up or is the system just more porous than people want to believe it is?

The state->federal connection is really not perfect. Go take a look at the list I posted of what each state is working on under the NICS Improvement Act.
However, inside the state there's really no excuse for a local jurisdicition (the tribe) reporting it, if that's what happened.

As for lying on the form, that is why the check is run. If what was on the form was believed, an FFL could just say you're good.

Interestingly there was a study where the state POCs do a far deeper and broader search generally than the FBI. The FBI only checks NICS index, Triple-I, and NCIC. Another example is some states will do a broader name search than just using what is on the form (which is apparently what the FBI does). The state POC also checks the NICS index of course.

As I mentioned earlier, by definition the state check (for a person's records within that state) is a superset of what FBI has access to.

So, there's no federal failure in this case, but the information sent to them can always be improved, and someone definitely messed up here, either the state or the tribal LE/courts.

On the other hand - his 14yo son was given access to a handgun. That's legal in your home for example under WA law. I know plenty of 14yo boys, be happy to take them shooting, but I would not let them have unsupervised access to a handgun.

[deadshot2]

But was the ball really dropped? If tribes aren't required to submit records to either the state or the federal databases, then did anyone really screw up or is the system just more porous than people want to believe it is?

The state->federal connection is really not perfect. Go take a look at the list I posted of what each state is working on under the NICS Improvement Act.
However, inside the state there's really no excuse for a local jurisdicition (the tribe) reporting it, if that's what happened.

As for lying on the form, that is why the check is run. If what was on the form was believed, an FFL could just say you're good.

Interestingly there was a study where the state POCs do a far deeper and broader search generally than the FBI. The FBI only checks NICS index, Triple-I, and NCIC. Another example is some states will do a broader name search than just using what is on the form (which is apparently what the FBI does). The state POC also checks the NICS index of course.

As I mentioned earlier, by definition the state check (for a person's records within that state) is a superset of what FBI has access to.

So, there's no federal failure in this case, but the information sent to them can always be improved, and someone definitely messed up here, either the state or the tribal LE/courts.

On the other hand - his 14yo son was given access to a handgun. That's legal in your home for example under WA law. I know plenty of 14yo boys, be happy to take them shooting, but I would not let them have unsupervised access to a handgun.

The tribe doesn't even have to report the information to the Fed's. All they have to do is give it to the Snohomish County Sheriff's office and they do it all for them.

No system works when their is inadequate information or information is withheld. This is why we always seem to find out about the mental health issues that were well known AFTER someone shoots up a School, Mall, Theater, or public gathering.

Penalties should be levied on those who withhold information from the NICS regardless of their excuses. ANY criminal comviction, including Domestic Violence protective orders, even if you are a Tribe running your own court.

Laws need to be changed so that anyone who is treated for any mental illness that could result in violence like we've been seeing all to often lately should also be reported. We may not be able to stop the criminal exchange of firearms but do we need to totally overlook one segment that seems to do the most damage, those who've gone off the rails mentally?

[mislabeled]

It's worth pointing out that the guy who lied on the 4473 is not the one who used the gun in a crime. We're all ready to pounce on him but, had his son not been a monster, no one would ever be the wiser and no harm may have ever come from that firearm sitting in his house. Saying, "See! This is why terrible things happen!" is a little far reaching.

If the dad was the one pulling the trigger that day in the cafeteria, it would be another story. But he wasn't. Yes, his possession of the gun was a crime, but the link being drawn between the two events isn't quite the straight line it's being made out to be. I don't want the culpability of the son to be mitigated as a result of the father's actions. The son is the actual killer here.

[Guns4Liberty]

It's worth pointing out that the guy who lied on the 4473 is not the one who used the gun in a crime. We're all ready to pounce on him but, had his son not been a monster, no one would ever be the wiser and no harm may have ever come from that firearm sitting in his house. Saying, "See! This is why terrible things happen!" is a little far reaching.

If the dad was the one pulling the trigger that day in the cafeteria, it would be another story. But he wasn't. Yes, his possession of the gun was a crime, but the link being drawn between the two events isn't quite the straight line it's being made out to be. I don't want the culpability of the son to be mitigated as a result of the father's actions. The son is the actual killer here.

Both the father and the son committed crimes, but they were separate crimes. The first enabled the second, but that doesn't mean the second wouldn't have been committed without the first.