Murderous 'monster' acquires an arsenal
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by NancyBlueINOklahoma (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Last edited Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:24 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: Minneapolis Star Tribune
They knew the Delano house far too well. It was where Christian Philip Oberender, then 14 years old, had murdered his mother in a shotgun ambush in the family rec room in 1995.
Now, 18 years later, Carver County Sheriff Jim Olson was sending his deputies back to the home where Oberender still lives. Just two days earlier, Olson had scanned the day's shift reports and froze when he tripped over Oberender's name. A scan of a Facebook page then showed firearms spread out like a child's trophies on a bed inside the home, along with notes about the Newtown, Conn., gunman who shot 20 children to death.
snip
Even more disturbing was the letter Oberender had written recently to his late mother, Mary: "I am so homicide,'' it said in broken sentences. "I think about killing all the time. The monster want out. He only been out one time and someone die.''
snip
Even though Oberender killed his mother with a firearm, even though he was committed to the state hospital in St. Peter as mentally ill and dangerous more than a decade ago, he was able to obtain a permit to purchase firearms last May. That piece of paper gave Oberender, now 32, the ability to walk into any licensed Minnesota retailer and buy any assault weapon or pistol on the rack.
Read more: http://www.startribune.com/local/west/187610601.html
Another "responsible gun owner" who passed their background check.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)He seems extremely disturbed.
cbrer
(1,831 posts)To pursue mental health research funding and serious gun registration legislation, then we are pretty much doomed.
southerncrone
(5,506 posts)Strelnikov_
(7,772 posts)Socal31
(2,484 posts)Back to Politics 2013 for me.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)And I would consider this to be a pretty huge story, a mass shooting may have been stopped here.
Socal31
(2,484 posts)I was referring more to the sensationalizing of stories that would otherwise have stayed where they belonged previously.
The commentary in the OP is intellectually dishonest, and in my opinion doesn't fit what LBN used to mean, but what do I know?
Edit: Commentary in OP has since been edited.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Socal31
(2,484 posts)Commentary based in emotion instead of fact leads me to believe the person is not posting the story to enlighten DU on a breaking news story, but to push their POV on an issue that is not black and white in our party.
Edit: OP commentary has changed, and now my view of this has as well. I can now see this thread containing legitimate discussion on how to stop whackos like this from obtaining these weapons.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)The fact is he was able to get a permit from the state that allowed him to by guns in a way that would appear legal to any gun retailer.
Commentary has always been allowed on Late Breaking News, try posting in Late Breaking News sometime and you will see the admins give you your very own spot to add your own commentary.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)as federal law prohibits gun ownership by anyone
"who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;"
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)You do have a point that he did have to hide his past to get the permit, it does reveal however just how inadequate the current system is at doing adequate background checks.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts)As long as he didn't lie on his permit application, I don't know if he could be sentenced for buying a gun after the state issues him a permit. A gun merchant definitely can't be sentenced for selling him one. Therefore, he did it legally. Case law may say something else, but that's how it appear to me.
No argument that there was some sort of error, but I think the state "legalized" the ownership of his guns when they made the error. It wasn't the intent of the law, but the practical results were the same. Calling him a legal gun owner isn't stretching the point.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)(And also according to the article he apparently did lie about his actual name)
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)alfredo
(60,060 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)n/t
NickB79
(19,063 posts)We actually have some fairly decent gun laws in this state. To buy a regular hunting rifle or shotgun here in MN, you only need to submit to a standard NICS background check at the gun store. In order to purchase a handgun or pistol-gripped assault rifle, however, you need a permit to purchase them first (this is NOT the same as a permit to carry, you need to complete a separate class first for that). That means going into the local police station, filling out 2 pages of paperwork, and waiting approximately 2 weeks while the police (supposedly) conduct a thorough background check, one far more detailed than the NICS check you undergo at the store. That permit must be renewed every 2 years to keep it valid.
If they issued him that permit, either someone in the station REALLY screwed up, or there are some serious deficiencies in his criminal record as recorded by the state.
quakerboy
(13,893 posts)There were apparently multiple lapses.
He transposed his first and middle name. Which is apparently enough to throw the system off track. Particularly since there is no requirement for a social security number or fingerprinting to prove identity. Since the application was accepted and passed through, it would seem there is also no requirement to show your ID to prove you are who you say you are.
Do you have to show ID to vote there? Apparently not to buy a gun.
The article also states that the police only have 7 days to accomplish their background check, not two weeks.
Then somehow his criminal record and mental health record didn't get attached to his file, so even if they connected him to his own record, he might still have passed. And, at least by the article, it seems that this is not an unknown or uncommon issue.
UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)"This was one of our concerns during the 'Conceal and Carry' debate in Legislature 10 years ago and it was beaten down like everything else," said Heather Martens, executive director of Protect Minnesota, a gun violence prevention organization.
Martens said Oberender's case highlights the reluctance of lawmakers to tighten gun laws because they fear being accused of infringing on individual rights. "Public schoolteachers have to go through a complete background check, even including a fingerprint,'' Martens said. "For buyers of assault weapons and pistols, law enforcement currently has only seven days to verify the person's identity and criminal history --otherwise, a permit is automatically granted. We should at least allow police enough time to verify the person's identity.''
Kablooie
(18,544 posts)He would have just bought them illegally from criminals in the street so the background check wouldn't have made any difference at all.
---
Just spouting the NRA argument to see how it sounds. It sounds pretty stupid.
Unfortunately the stupider an argument sounds, the more convincing it is to the right wing.
Crunchy Frog
(26,539 posts)McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)The NRA wants criminals and the insane to have weapons, so that the rest of us will buy weapons of our own, out of fear. Every time some nut job shoots up a school, the NRA does a quiet mental "high five".
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)It's a great background story, but it really doesn't meet the SOP of LBN.
This is a background/analysis article on an event that happened in the past.
Also it is a local story. The hosts realize that gun stories are all the rage on DU lately, but we have agreed that we can't fill LBN up with every single "gun" event.
This would be good for Good Reads if you would like to repost.
--------------------------
Statement of Purpose for Latest Breaking News Forum
Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only.
No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours.
Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1014