Florida stopped doing background checks for conceal carry permits for a year.

[Phisher]

http://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...-checks-for-a-year-because-it-couldnt-log-in/

For more than a year, the state of Florida failed to conduct national background checks on tens of thousands of applications for concealed weapons permits, potentially allowing drug addicts or people with a mental illness to carry firearms in public.

The employee in charge of the background checks could not log into the system, the investigator learned. The problem went unresolved until discovered by another worker in March 2017 — meaning that for more than a year applications got approved without the required background check.

During that time, which coincided with the June 12, 2016 shooting at Pulse nightclub that left 50 dead, the state saw an unprecedented spike in applications for concealed weapons permits. There were 134,000 requests for permits in the fiscal year ending in June 2015. The next 12 months broke a record, 245,000 applications, which was topped again in 2017 when the department received 275,000 applications.

Department employees interviewed for the report called the NICS checks "extremely important." Concealed weapons licenses "may have been issued to potentially ineligible individuals." If it came out they weren't conducted, "this could cause an embarrassment to the agency," the report said.

I'd laugh if this kind of incompetence weren't so dangerous to public safety.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Government efficiency at work.

 

[Greoric]

Where's the threat to public safety? Do people that know they wouldn't pass a background check typically submit themselves to one?

 

[Bobby 3 Sticks]

Government efficiency at work.

This is Florida. The same state that set the bar for the failure that is drug testing welfare recipients

 

[RerouteToRemain]

I'd laugh if this kind of incompetence weren't so dangerous to public safety.

Complete non issue/story imo.

I would say nearly all people submitting to that and knowing what goes along with it (picture id, finger prints, supposed to have a background check, etc) is probably not someone to worry about.

In my state and a few others you don't need a ccw license to conceal carry.

To add to this criminals don't give a fuck about the law and would carry anyway.

 

[bushman505]

Luckily no criminals tried to get a CC license...I mean a criminal would never carry a concealed license without a permit.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Certainly no person has ever been turned down because of a background check.

 

[Neph]

Certainly no person has ever been turned down because of a background check.

Not for at least a year now!

 

[Ghost in the Dark]

 

[Neph]

video games

 

[Ghost in the Dark]

Where's the threat to public safety? Do people that know they wouldn't pass a background check typically submit themselves to one?

Great point Greoric.

Let's cancel driving tests and background checks for people working with kids next. Reduce that oppressive government burden on people right. What could go wrong?

 

[Neph]

Great point Greoric.

Let's cancel driving tests and background checks for people working with kids next. Reduce that oppressive government burden on people right. What could go wrong?

I mean you can access kids readily by driving past a school. I don't see why you would encumber people with a test that they wouldn't take if they were not going to pass already. Seems so meaningless.

 

[Ghost in the Dark]

I mean you can access kids readily by driving past a school. I don't see why you would encumber people with a test that they wouldn't take if they were not going to pass already. Seems so meaningless.

I say let the Free Market handle this! If parents don't like their kids getting raped they can just withdraw their business and send them to a different nursery or school. Those places will be outcompeted by ones where that doesn't happen! As for driving tests it's every citizen's OWN RESPONSIBILITY to defend himself so people can easily avoid being killed by crazy drivers by fitting defensive armour and ballast to their vehicles. The Government needs to STAY OUT of our business!

 

[Neph]

I say let the Free Market handle this! If parents don't like their kids getting raped they can just send them to a different nursery or school. Those places will be outcompeted by ones where that doesn't happen! As for driving tests it's every citizen's OWN RESPONSIBILITY to defend himself so people can easily avoid being killed by crazy drivers by fitting defensive armour and ballast to their vehicles. The Government needs to STAY OUT of our business!

They should scrap college/university exams altogether. Why would you go do one if you didn't think you would pass anyway? It cost you thousands to go through the course so there's a huge financial disincentive. We might as well just scrap them because no-one would fail the exam. It would also help students with anxiety issues and increase social cohesiveness because people wouldn't be "failing" or being left behind. Think of the politicians who could tout their success in education reform!

 

[Scrody]

Whoops

 

[woodguyatl]

Where's the threat to public safety? Do people that know they wouldn't pass a background check typically submit themselves to one?

About 2% do apparently.

 

[oldshadow]

It's more a "It was suppose to happen and didn't because of the law" then anything a number of states don't even do any checks.

 

[KILL KILL]

Where's the threat to public safety? Do people that know they wouldn't pass a background check typically submit themselves to one?

Not trying to be mean, but this is the worst logic I've seen in a while. Why have background checks for anything then?

 

[oldshadow]

 

[Neph]

That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses

Furthermore, economist Alex Tabarrok has noted an interesting issue of statistics in his blog post, “Defensive Gun Use and the Difficult Statistics of Rare Events“:

People answering surveys can be mistaken and some lie and the reasons go both ways. Some people might be unwilling to answer because a defensive gun use might have been illegal (Would these people refuse to answer?). On the other hand, mischievous responders might report a defensive gun use just because that makes them sound cool.

The deep problem, however, is not miscodings per se but that miscodings of rare events are likely to be asymmetric. Since defensive gun use is relatively uncommon under any reasonable scenario there are many more opportunities to miscode in a way that inflates defensive gun use than there are ways to miscode in a way that deflates defensive gun use...

The bottom line is that it’s good to know that the original Kleck and Gertz survey replicated — approximately 1% of adult Americans did report a defensive gun use in the 1990s — but the real issue is the interpretation of the survey and for that a replication doesn’t help.

US homicide rate vs Others homicide rate

United States: 5.35 / 100,000 (land of the free and brave where gun toting cowboys save lives every minute of every day according to Sherdog)
Iran: 2.47 / 100,000 (9/11 conspirators and 100% terrorists according to Sherdog) (116% more likely to be murdered in the US than in Iran)
Tajikistan: 1.61 / 100,000 (who the fuck is this according to Sherdog. Maybe they need more freedom if the country ends in 'stan' ) (232% more likely to be murdered in the US than Tajikistan)
France: 1.23 / 100,000 (terrorist nexus/mecca and second coming of Islamic hell according to Sherdog) (334% more likely to be murdered in the US than in France)
United Kingdom: 1.2 / 100,000 (4th world country aka cesspool of depravity according to Sherdog) (345% more likely to be murdered in the US than in the UK)
Australia: 0.94 / 100,000 (freedomless, speechless convict colony according to Sherdog) (469% more likely to be murdered in the US than in Australia)
Germany: 0.88 / 100,000 (pansy leftists giving their country over to Islamic extremists, also consider copy/pasting France, according to Sherdog) (508% more likely to be murdered in the US than in Germany)