PDA

View Full Version : Why Didn't FBI Act When it Saw FL Shooter Doing Background Check in FBI Databases?



metco
06-19-2016, 07:05 PM
Simple question. Although the Feds say they couldn't stop a former terror watch-list suspect who had been interviewed three times from buying a high capacity, semi-automatic rifle, because he was no longer on the watch list LOL, why wouldn't agents be flagged when a former terror suspect was trying to by a massacre weapon? We all know now that it was bought legally with a background check, the databases of which are owned and run by the FBI.

lol dumbasses who still don't know this was a flag to further demonize Muslims and push the gun-grab. What sorry ass sheeple you are.

nb4 nutsy "Do you expect us to flag every former watch-list jihadi who was known to use inflammatory language and interviewed by the FBI three times from buying a high capacity, semi-automatic weapon??!!" (funny emoticon)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/orlando-shooter-bought-guns-previous-flags-fbi/story?id=39799861

"Orlando nightclub shooter Omar Mateen legally purchased the guns he had on him today within the past week, even though he had been known to law enforcement for years, federal officials confirmed."

HoganIsGOAT
06-19-2016, 07:33 PM
What exactly did you expect the FBI to do that would have prevented this?

metco
06-19-2016, 07:41 PM
What exactly did you expect the FBI to do that would have prevented this?

well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?

GreatOldOne
06-19-2016, 07:47 PM
The feds should have some ability to present their case before a federal judge who could then say probable cause has been described (or not) which would then trigger a process which would interrupt any NICS check.

The accused after being denied should be able to challenge and bring their case before a judge to get off the no-buy list which gets searched during NICS processing.

The NRA supports something similar. There's consensus this idea makes sense. We should do it.

Steve707
06-19-2016, 07:47 PM
What's a 223 high capacity?

Ramoneb87
06-19-2016, 07:52 PM
A background check doesn't show what kind of firearm is being bought, this dude carried a gun for employment so as far as the FBI knew had they received a red flag he was just buying something for work

djfuzzy
06-19-2016, 08:09 PM
What's a 223 high capacity?I don't know but it sounds really scary so I'm checking out of this thread.

Dave22reborn
06-19-2016, 08:45 PM
So metco wants to empower the government to the point of denying someone the right to arm themselves, over something as simple as an investigation?

Dave22reborn
06-19-2016, 08:53 PM
well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?

It's a shame you didn't join, you'd fly through the ranks and revolutionize how things are done...

metco
06-19-2016, 08:56 PM
A background check doesn't show what kind of firearm is being bought, this dude carried a gun for employment so as far as the FBI knew had they received a red flag he was just buying something for work

The "dude" you mean the former terror watchlist dude? Oh that dude. Guess I'd still want to know why he was getting a gun.

SearsBrah
06-19-2016, 09:09 PM
The "dude" you mean the former terror watchlist dude? Oh that dude. Guess I'd still want to know why he was getting a gun.

And he responds "home defense".

WTF is the FBI going to do?

Usually you conspiracy nuts don't want the government to have unlimited power to void citizens of their constitutional rights. You are unique.

Ramoneb87
06-19-2016, 09:22 PM
The "dude" you mean the former terror watchlist dude? Oh that dude. Guess I'd still want to know why he was getting a gun.

And in no way would he be legally obligated to disclose that information.

This guy was under FBI survielence in 2013 and 2014 and interviewed by the FBI on 3 separate occassions, the mosque he also attended was under investigation as well. The FBI dropped the ball and found nothing on him, and in this country we are innocent until proven guilty. Blame due process or the FBI for failing in their investigation but at the end of the day this guy wascompletely justified in buying a gun especially considering a gun is required for his job.

Igmann
06-19-2016, 09:25 PM
Being on a government watch list does not prohibit you from purchasing anything that any other ordinary citizen can purchase. If he had a clean criminal record, they had no choice but to approve it.

metco
06-19-2016, 09:48 PM
And he responds "home defense".

WTF is the FBI going to do?

Usually you conspiracy nuts don't want the government to have unlimited power to void citizens of their constitutional rights. You are unique.

Except it wasn't a handgun, sheep. It was a high velocity rifle. I just told you what the FBI can do, are you retarded? If you are I don't have time. Read a couple post above and tell me what it says, here: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171741323&p=1448614673&viewfull=1#post1448614673

Read the fukking thread before offering your stupid opinion.

otisthebat
06-19-2016, 09:54 PM
Except it wasn't a handgun, sheep. It was a high velocity rifle. I just told you what the FBI can do, are you retarded? If you are I don't have time. Read a couple post above and tell me what it says, here: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171741323&p=1448614673&viewfull=1#post1448614673

Read the fukking thread before offering your stupid opinion.

what is a .223 high capacity?

and it's already been said in this thread that the FBI doesn't know what firearm you are purchasing when they run a background check.

why do you want the government to have the power to strip rights from citizens who have not committed a crime?

metco
06-19-2016, 10:05 PM
what is a .223 high capacity?

and it's already been said in this thread that the FBI doesn't know what firearm you are purchasing when they run a background check.

why do you want the government to have the power to strip rights from citizens who have not committed a crime?

Sure. He's buying something, but we don't know what it is. Fuk it. Let's get some donuts.

otisthebat
06-19-2016, 10:10 PM
Sure. He's buying something, but we don't know what it is. Fuk it. Let's get some donuts.

that's not an answer.

Dave22reborn
06-19-2016, 10:44 PM
Sure. He's buying something, but we don't know what it is. Fuk it. Let's get some donuts.

How many agents did you want following this man 24/7?

metco
06-19-2016, 11:06 PM
what is a .223 high capacity?

and it's already been said in this thread that the FBI doesn't know what firearm you are purchasing when they run a background check.

why do you want the government to have the power to strip rights from citizens who have not committed a crime?

Why do you want the gun grab agenda to succeed, by covering up and obfuscating for the false flags?

LargePeter
06-20-2016, 03:31 AM
Simple question. Although the Feds say they couldn't stop a former terror watch-list suspect who had been interviewed three times from buying a high capacity, semi-automatic rifle, because he was no longer on the watch list LOL, why wouldn't agents be flagged when a former terror suspect was trying to by a massacre weapon? We all know now that it was bought legally with a background check, the databases of which are owned and run by the FBI.

lol dumbasses who still don't know this was a flag to further demonize Muslims and push the gun-grab. What sorry ass sheeple you are.

nb4 nutsy "Do you expect us to flag every former watch-list jihadi who was known to use inflammatory language and interviewed by the FBI three times from buying a high capacity, semi-automatic weapon??!!" (funny emoticon)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/orlando-shooter-bought-guns-previous-flags-fbi/story?id=39799861

Obama signed off the purchase as an executive order

Don't be a racist bigot OP

nutsy54
06-20-2016, 03:55 AM
Why Didn't FBI Act When it Saw FL Shooter Doing Background Check in FBI Databases?
Because they had no reason, and no legal authority to "act". This was a gun buyer who'd never been convicted... or even charged... with a crime. Yet you want the FBI to "act"? How many other innocent US citizens do you want the FBI to "act" against in your all-powerful government utopia?


Simple question.
Simple answer. Which you already know. So why do you keep asking it in multiple threads?


lol dumbasses who still don't know this was a flag to further demonize Muslims and push the gun-grab. What sorry ass sheeple you are.
So... it's a "false flag"... BECAUSE THE FBI FOLLOWED THE LAW? Your posts make no sense. You claim the government is out murdering Americans in same fictional false flag delusion, but you want that government to have exponentially more power to eliminate your rights on a whim?

nutsy54
06-20-2016, 03:57 AM
well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?
Holy crap - the anti-government CT wants a police state. I guess this explains why you also backed Big Government Sanders :rolleyes:


Why do you want the gun grab agenda to succeed, by covering up and obfuscating for the false flags?
Because they aren't false flags. Constantly making a claim, with no proof or evidence, doesn't make your claim true.

Meanwhile, YOU are the one advocating that any US citizen should lose their rights if someone merely makes a baseless accusation against them.

nutsy54
06-20-2016, 04:01 AM
So metco wants to empower the government to the point of denying someone the right to arm themselves, over something as simple as an investigation?
An investigation which occurred three years ago...
And found nothing worth pursuing as a criminal investigation, indictment, or trial...

The Stazi would have loved people like metco - just name a name once, and the Government can eliminate their rights any time in the future.

JUSA
06-20-2016, 04:56 AM
A background check doesn't show what kind of firearm is being bought, this dude carried a gun for employment so as far as the FBI knew had they received a red flag he was just buying something for work This. All they would know was it was a long gun. Nothing more.

Psyllius
06-20-2016, 05:12 AM
I think a better question would be. What could the FBI have done that could have prevented Mateen from succeeding?

Is there really a way for them to have stopped him?

I find it funny that a know threat was working security and had firearm licenses. Like wtf lmao.

HoganIsGOAT
06-20-2016, 05:18 AM
well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?

Again, what exactly did you expect the FBI to do that would have prevented this?

US_Ranger
06-20-2016, 06:20 AM
I think a better question would be. What could the FBI have done that could have prevented Mateen from succeeding?

Is there really a way for them to have stopped him?

I find it funny that a know threat was working security and had firearm licenses. Like wtf lmao.

Yes, there is a way. It's called stripping people of:

a) their 2nd amendment rights
and
b) their 4th amendment rights

I'm seeing more and more people (even "progressive" friends of mine) supporting the reduction of your right to defend yourself against an accuser. I always knew people hated the 2nd amendment but now I'm watching them saying guilty until proven innocent is okay.

I honestly don't think it'll be too long before the Constitution is a document that's just viewed as history. It's getting completely out of hand.

otisthebat
06-20-2016, 06:36 AM
Why do you want the gun grab agenda to succeed, by covering up and obfuscating for the false flags?

What. The. F*ck. Does that have to do with anything that I said? Why can't you answer simple questions?

Also, I think you're the one who wants the gun grab agenda to succeed, since you literally want the FBI to to grab the guns of people who have not committed a crime.

And here you are saying that the evil government is behind all these false flags, yet you literally just said that you want to give that evil government the power to strip away the rights of citizens.

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 07:02 AM
An investigation which occurred three years ago...
And found nothing worth pursuing as a criminal investigation, indictment, or trial...

The Stazi would have loved people like metco - just name a name once, and the Government can eliminate their rights any time in the future.

Like a female, he's to stubborn to admit he's wrong. That or its just plain ignorance.

SearsBrah
06-20-2016, 07:39 AM
Except it wasn't a handgun, sheep. It was a high velocity rifle. I just told you what the FBI can do, are you retarded? If you are I don't have time. Read a couple post above and tell me what it says, here: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171741323&p=1448614673&viewfull=1#post1448614673

Read the fukking thread before offering your stupid opinion.

Lol.

How do you make it through daily life?

badreligion
06-20-2016, 07:53 AM
What exactly did you expect the FBI to do that would have prevented this?

Well for one , if a person is on the terror/no fly list they can't buy a gun .

elterrible987
06-20-2016, 08:06 AM
well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?


Yeah that sucks they missed the opportunity to ask him what he was planning to do with that gun because surely he would have told them he planned to shoot up a gay night club with it.

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 08:22 AM
Well for one , if a person is on the terror/no fly list they can't buy a gun .

You can be on a no fly list for panic attacks, you think something like that should prevent someone from being armed?

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 08:24 AM
Lol.

How do you make it through daily life?

Well, since Bernie lost, he went through a depression and now he's back to believing that everything that happens is a false flag.

badreligion
06-20-2016, 08:43 AM
You can be on a no fly list for panic attacks, you think something like that should prevent someone from being armed?

If they are on the FBI's list , yes . This guy was and look what happened . I am by no means opposed to guns and if people want to own them they should be allowed to but there has to be some changes .

HoganIsGOAT
06-20-2016, 08:45 AM
Well for one , if a person is on the terror/no fly list they can't buy a gun .

That doesn't answer the question though.


What exactly did you expect the FBI to do that would have prevented this?

metco
06-20-2016, 12:26 PM
That doesn't answer the question though.

It is abundantly clear that once you have a terror suspect confirmed to have bought a semi-automatic weapon, there are many things you can do. You can arrest detain him for questioning then start looking through his hard drive and other communications, and they would have found radical jihadi literature. Now you have a conspiracy case.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-87560345/

Omar Mateen increasingly sought out Islamic State videos and other radical Islamist propaganda in the months leading up to his shooting rampage at an Orlando, Fla., gay nightclub Sunday, investigators have found.

A counter-terrorism official said investigators had uncovered the material while reviewing Mateen's Internet search history.

Why is everyone acting as it the FBI doesn't trample all over peoples' privacy rights, mostly political dissidents like OWS, anytime it wants? Now in the clear case of a terror suspect buying a Sig Sauer they act like they give a fuk about rights, so they couldn't have done anything.

metco
06-20-2016, 12:27 PM
Lol.

How do you make it through daily life?

Your sister helps me quite a lot : )

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 01:50 PM
If they are on the FBI's list , yes . This guy was and look what happened . I am by no means opposed to guns and if people want to own them they should be allowed to but there has to be some changes .

And if someone can't get one legally, because their name is on some list, they'll get one illegaly.

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 01:55 PM
It is abundantly clear that once you have a terror suspect confirmed to have bought a semi-automatic weapon, there are many things you can do. You can arrest detain him for questioning then start looking through his hard drive and other communications, and they would have found radical jihadi literature. Now you have a conspiracy case.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-87560345/


Why is everyone acting as it the FBI doesn't trample all over peoples' privacy rights, mostly political dissidents like OWS, anytime it wants? Now in the clear case of a terror suspect buying a Sig Sauer they act like they give a fuk about rights, so they couldn't have done anything.

What did they do to the OWS parasites?

elterrible987
06-20-2016, 02:10 PM
It is abundantly clear that once you have a terror suspect confirmed to have bought a semi-automatic weapon, there are many things you can do. You can arrest detain him for questioning then start looking through his hard drive and other communications, and they would have found radical jihadi literature. Now you have a conspiracy case.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-87560345/


Why is everyone acting as it the FBI doesn't trample all over peoples' privacy rights, mostly political dissidents like OWS, anytime it wants? Now in the clear case of a terror suspect buying a Sig Sauer they act like they give a fuk about rights, so they couldn't have done anything.


What should be done with the FBI's **** up? Who should be fired? The Attorney General?

Also sounds like we need to increase the FBI's budget.

ToPHeR35
06-20-2016, 02:14 PM
If they are on the FBI's list , yes . This guy was and look what happened . I am by no means opposed to guns and if people want to own them they should be allowed to but there has to be some changes .

Yea, and he also worked for a government contractor.....

Roke
06-20-2016, 02:57 PM
Why should they act when they already hired an actor?

nutsy54
06-20-2016, 05:55 PM
Well for one , if a person is on the terror/no fly list they can't buy a gun .
The FBI has no control over that. It would require new federal laws - which by definition would violate multiple Constitutional rights, since the "no fly" list (which Mateen WASN'T on) requires no judicial or due process to end up on.

nutsy54
06-20-2016, 05:57 PM
It is abundantly clear that once you have a terror suspect ...
Except he wasn't a "terror suspect"... but why let facts get in the way of your demands for a totalitarian government that can summarily remove anyone's rights for any reason?

Dave22reborn
06-20-2016, 06:03 PM
The FBI has no control over that. It would require new federal laws - which by definition would violate multiple Constitutional rights, since the "no fly" list (was Mateen even on that?) requires no judicial or due process to end up on.

Exactly, you can be on it for having panic attacks.

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/09/09/8-ways-can-end-up-on-no-fly-list.html

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5617599.html

metco
06-20-2016, 08:10 PM
What should be done with the FBI's **** up? Who should be fired? The Attorney General?

Also sounds like we need to increase the FBI's budget.

It's more than a fuk up it's a set up. The FBI is too smart not to know the guy was buying a gun. At a minimum Comey should be fired. The lawsuits are coming.

otisthebat
06-20-2016, 08:11 PM
It's more than a fuk up it's a set up. The FBI is too smart not to know the guy was buying a gun. At a minimum Comey should be fired. The lawsuits are coming.

And you want to give the government more power so they can more easily conduct these set ups, false flags, and cover ups?

metco
06-21-2016, 12:58 PM
The FBI has no control over that. It would require new federal laws - which by definition would violate multiple Constitutional rights, since the "no fly" list (which Mateen WASN'T on) requires no judicial or due process to end up on.

This has nothing to do with the no-fly list' It has to do with a simple flag in the background check database, which the FBI runs, if a serious person of interest tries to buy a weapon. That cost nothing and violates nobody's rights. How does it really feel to be a shill for mass murder?

veggie530
06-21-2016, 01:01 PM
well let's see, that's a tough one, if I had seen him in a red flag coming from my own database trying to put through a background check for a .223 high capacity, even if I were a really dumb, incompetent boob of an FBI agent I might have drove over to his house and asked what he was thinking of doing. Just really, really basic you know. If I were a good FBI agent I might have put a tracker on his car and had his house watched, ya know, all that sht we pay millions for the FBI to do. I dunno, maybe just maybe I might have told my boss we might a leetle problem. And all.

I mean are you fukking serious?

Why do you keep saying high capacity?

JMath
06-21-2016, 01:15 PM
If they are on the FBI's list , yes . This guy was and look what happened . I am by no means opposed to guns and if people want to own them they should be allowed to but there has to be some changes .

Stop. Just stop. Mateen WAS on the list (past tense). They investigated him in 2013 and 2014 and took him off. Years after that he bought this gun. So now that the facts are clear I'll ask two questions.

1) How would prohibiting people who are arbitrarily thrown onto lists have prevented this specific attack? Remember, he was NOT on the list anymore when he purchased it.

2) How long after the FBI investigates you (for being arbitrarily thrown onto a list) and declares you to not be a threat should you continue to be denied your constitutional right which was already taken from you without due process?

All of the BS laws people are proposing now wouldn't have done anything to prevent this, yet they're using it as a war cry for their ideas.

nutsy54
06-21-2016, 02:10 PM
It's more than a fuk up it's a set up. The FBI is too smart not to know the guy was buying a gun. At a minimum Comey should be fired. The lawsuits are coming.
Explain why the FBI Director should be fired for NOT violating federal law over a gun sale he'd have no idea was even happening...?

Do you have any clue what you're talking about, or is it just endlessly fixated ranting on a predetermined verdict that completely ignores all reality & facts?

nutsy54
06-21-2016, 02:14 PM
This has nothing to do with the no-fly list' It has to do with a simple flag in the background check database, which the FBI runs, if a serious person of interest tries to buy a weapon. That cost nothing and violates nobody's rights. How does it really feel to be a shill for mass murder?
There is no such thing as the process you're claiming!

It doesn't exist. So the only way for that to happen would have been for the FBI to violate federal law and summarily suspend Constitutional rights, with no due process or legal justification.

Of course, when your fictional bullsh*t claims fall apart, just pretend the only explanation is someone must be a "shill" for something they never supported.

You're just bat-sh*t crazy.

AetasNitor
06-21-2016, 02:45 PM
In this thread metco, who is voting for and supports someone under fbi investigation, supports the reduction of rights for anyone under investigation.