Quote:
|
I'm saying the red flags should have delayed the approval process for additional review. Upon additional review (whatever it may be - probably will require interviews with people - dunno), if warranted, the individual should be take to court. I am for due process.
|
As it currently works, NICS is just an up-down system. You fill out a form 4473. If your state uses the NICS system and not their own state system, AND you do not have a NICS-compliant CHL, your identifying information is compared to the NICS database. If you are in there, you are denied. If you aren't, you get passed.
If it looks like it might be you in there; but maybe it is someone else - or the information reported to NICS is inconclusive "misdemeanor assault conviction" that might or might not be disqualifying domestic violence, you get delayed for three days. All NICS will do then is ask the reporting agency to clarify. If the reporting agency doesn't clarify for whatever reason within three days, you can purchase the firearm.
There is currently no mechanism to report "this guy is crazy as a loon; but not a prohibited person." That has to be done long before NICS gets involved. There were plenty of opportunities to do that here. They just weren't done. Likely because no prosecutor or cop wanted to give the electronic mark of Cain to a young teenager making stupid decisions and forever effect his future opportunities.
As you can see, the ATF barely manages to investigate NICS denials. The FBI runs NICS with even fewer resources. Having them do the kinds of follow-ups you suggest once the NICS process is initiated seems impractical even if you think the general idea is valid.