Aurora shooter unhindered by background check

background check or screening. According to the New York Times, the suspect ordered 3,000 rounds of handgun ammunition, 3,000 rounds for an assault rifle and 350 shells for a 12-gauge shotgun — an amount of firepower that costs roughly $3,000 at the online sites — in the four months before the shooting. He also bought bulletproof vests and other tactical gear, and a high-capacity “drum magazine” large enough to hold 100 rounds and capable of firing 50 or 60 rounds per minute — a purchase that would have been restricted under proposed legislation that has been stalled in Washington for more than a year. How was this possible? The shooter was able to build such a large amount of ammunition for two reasons – because, in most cases, the sellers are not required to report sales to law enforcement, and also due to the fact that neither Colorado nor federal law required him to submit to a background check or register his purchases. While a few states have enforced regulation on ammunition sales, most have not. Gun-control groups said the purchases of the ammunition demonstrated how easily anyone could build a veritable arsenal without attracting attention from state or federal law-enforcement officials. Gun groups replied that stricter controls would not make the nation safer, but would only restrict constitutional rights. “I have an issue with people being able to buy ammunition and weapons on the Internet,” Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey of the Philadelphia police said on the ABC program “This Week” on Sunday. “I don’t know why people need to have assault weapons. There needs to be reasonable gun control put in place. “And we talk about this constantly, and absolutely nothing happens, because many of our legislators, unfortunately, at the federal level, lack the courage to do anything.” It’s a highly controversial topic, and one that may result in even greater divisions in an election year. Regardless of whether you believe gun control would infringe your rights or not, everyone can surely agree measures need to be put in place to prevent something like this happening again – whether that be in the format of more stringent background checks or via other means.]]>