(June 14, 2016 at 9:46 am)dyresand Wrote: one that has a been investigated and been visited by the FBI should not be able to get a weapon.
I disagree with you here, and the problem I have with this argument is the same one I have against people who argue that Clinton shouldn't be allowed to run for President because she's being investigated by the FBI.
An investigation is nothing without an actual conviction. There are plenty of investigations which end with no charges filed, so to deprive a person of rights simply because they are under an investigation flies in the face of "innocent until proven guilty". The fact is, in this case, the FBI not only investigated the shooter, but they decided against pursuing charges, presumably because they had no actual evidence he was planning on doing anything.
This probably happens far more than people realize, and most times the person is actually not a criminal and nothing bad happens. This unfortunately wasn't one of these times.
Another reason I don't think it is a good idea is that investigations by the FBI of this nature are often secretive, as in, the person being investigated isn't aware of the investigation. If that person went to buy a gun and got rejected, they would likely want to know why, and may conclude that they are being investigated, which would put them in a state of alert that might cause them to try and leave the country.
A better system would be some kind of monitoring list, where names of people who have been investigated in the last X years are added, and when they try and buy a gun, a notification gets sent to the person in charge of the investigation, who can then decide whether or not this is indicative of a threat to national security.
