(02-16-2018, 08:22 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote:

(02-16-2018, 06:05 PM)jj82284 Wrote: civil liberties are the rights of the individual.  The minute that the individual demonstrates himself to be a risk to himself but more specifically to others then it's no longer question civil liberties it's a question of the state's ability and compelling interest to protect its citizens from those of us that may not be mentally well.  There were several instances by which the state could have a engaged criminal justice system by which this person would have had a criminal record that would have prevented them from having a gun or be pursued some form institutionalization or correction because this person that demonstrated time and time again that his emotional / mental state made him an imminent threat to others.

The problem here is the alphabet agencies don't play well with each other. There are simply too many government agencies anyway, and it's worse in cases like this where they don't talk to each other, or the communication is S-L-O-W. They are also understaffed and overworked which compounds the problem. Then you have the people in it for the steady pay and benefits and don't really care about the job; you have the ones close to retirement who don't really care anymore, they're just biding their time; the ones who don't want to deal with the "case thrown on their desk" so they half [BLEEP] it. 

Many, many reasons why this and so many others slip through the cracks.

you're right.  Lest we forget, there are currently over a thousand open FBI investigations about suspected ISIS operatives.  IT would take 16k FBI agents just to maintain surveillance on them. That says nothing of Alqueda, Bokoharam, AQAP, HAMAS, Foreign State Actors, Organized Crime, Drug Cartels, and any potential active serial killers.  The resources of the Federal government are limited.  Which brings me back to the point that it falls to the individual to be their primary source of defense against these whack jobs.  That's why it doesn't make sense to go overboard trying to keep responsible people from owning their own means of self defense.  

I could actually postulate a long drawn out string of thought about warrants and probable cause holds on being able to purchase a firearm during an open competence/threat assessment based on credible intel.  I could give a basic run down of how all of our rights are limited and can be suspended by the state if they show cause.  But then we have to remember that Soldiers returning from War can sometimes wait years just to get their disability rating.  We have a system where veterans were in a government health facility for the better part of a decade and never saw a doctor.

---