On Sun, 22 Dec 2019 14:13:12 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 2:35:07 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 22 Dec 2019 11:02:35 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 12/22/2019 09:30 AM, wrote:
You mean a real background check like Snowden or Manning passed with
flying colors?

Snowden and Manning embarrassed the government. The Walkers aided the
Soviets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Anthony_Walker

I was undergoing a background check when that **** hit the fan. DISCO,
which I think has morphed into DCSA, immediately stopped processing all
applications until they figured out how they screwed the pooch so badly.

Ames, Hanssen, the list goes on and then there are those that we
didn't hear about or haven't caught yet. They all passed very
comprehensive background checks. Trader seems to think that his ONE
example is a panacea.

Oh no, you're just delusional. You have it totally backwards. I know
that a reasonable permit process can't stop ALL mass shooters from
buying a gun. It will however cut down on the number who can.
On the other hand, your totally insane argument is that because
some people that pass a background check for a security clearance
wind up divulging information, that means the whole security clearance
process is worthless? Wow! But I understand, when the facts are
so obviously against you and arguments are reduced to rubble, that
kind of spurious nonsense is all that's left. You kind of sound like
Trump wailing away and making no sense.






Most of these shooters were squeaky clean until
they snapped, at least as far as any background check was going to
reveal.
All of this assumes they were not willing to just buy a gun off the
street or steal it anyway.

That still leaves a whole lot that were not clean, eg the Parkland shooter,
Ohio shooter, Virginia Tech shooter, etc. that could have been blocked
from walking into Dicks and buying guns.

Tell us why?

BTW None of these people bought their gun at Dicks. So you just like
saying "dick".