Skip to main content

View Diary: Negotiations over universal background checks collapse. Senate committee marking up four gun bills (207 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Lilith, true on both accounts - yet (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LilithGardener

    there's two forms of rejection.  A flat-out NO and a qualified maybe-maybe not.

    In PM I addressed this with a fellow kossack, and explained how the qualified "not right now" comes about.

    Her last name was fairly common.  Her first name could be spelled a number of different ways:
    Sarah, Sara, Sera, Sere.

    Take an address:  Oak.  Oakview.  Oak Terrace.  Oak Street.  Oaklawn.

    Take an age:  51
    Date of birth:  9.6.61  or 6.9.61

    Now if Sara, age 51, born 9.6.61 is in the system as being a prohibited person; and Sarah, age 51 born 6.9.61 applied for NICS clearance?  Both living on Oak something at the time the record was created/searched?

    You'll get a 72 HR HOLD result, not APPROVED.

    The reason may come from the respective State service which provides the interface, where a live human makes a decision on go/no go.

    That human may find the applicant suspect, as the DOB reversal and letter addition or deletion is a common alias ruse.

    So arresting Sarah with an H, would be a mistake, a miscarriage of justice.

    Requiring more documentation by the authorities which would determine that Sarah with an H is a black female, with a former address of Green Street.
    She is not Sara no H, white female, with an address of Oaklawn at the time of her adjudication.

    "The bill's sponsor has a better chance of being the next Pope" ~ attributed to Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri

    by 43north on Fri Mar 08, 2013 at 05:50:41 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site