On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:53:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/7/2017 11:24 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 09:35:13 -0500,
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 08:55:17 -0500, John H
wrote:

...who let that slip through the cracks.

"The Air Force also acknowledged that it had failed to transmit information about Kelley’s
conviction to the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC) system, a U.S. government data bank
used by licensed firearms dealers to check prospective gun buyers for criminal backgrounds."

http://tinyurl.com/yclpllx3


===

Like most governmental CFs it will probably turn out to be the fault
of organizational leadership faulure. I'd be really surprised if any
one individual is charged with negligence, and I'd also bet that they
will find a lot of other lapses.

It is things like this that make me wonder why people can say the
government should be the solution to all of our problems when their
incompetence is demonstrated every day.
This is clearly a failure of the process and I agree there are going
to be thousands of other lapses in this flawed process. If people like
Harry want universal background checks they should, first, be
interested in the validity of the data that is used in that background
check. It does go both ways. There are people on the "no buy" list
that are on there by mistake (not an easy thing to fix) and there are
others who should be and aren't.



There must be a couple of hundred lawyers heading for Texas right now.
Can a private citizen sue the Air Force or Department of Defense?

If so, this could cost the government millions upon millions if not more.


You can sue the government but usually just for specific performance
(getting a policy change), not damages. Usually these involve civil
rights issues, property rights or environmental policy.
I am sure the policy is already under review.
Then the question would be whether this is retroactive.
I suppose in the case of guns, the case would be made that the person
lied on the 4473.
There may be other issues tho. Unreported convictions from court
marshals might affect employment, licenses, adoptions and other things
people have been getting away with because the information was lost.

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:01:19 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 09:35:13 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 08:55:17 -0500, John H
wrote:

...who let that slip through the cracks.

"The Air Force also acknowledged that it had failed to transmit information about Kelley’s
conviction to the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC) system, a U.S. government data bank
used by licensed firearms dealers to check prospective gun buyers for criminal backgrounds."

http://tinyurl.com/yclpllx3


===

Like most governmental CFs it will probably turn out to be the fault
of organizational leadership faulure. I'd be really surprised if any
one individual is charged with negligence, and I'd also bet that they
will find a lot of other lapses.


Oh, I doubt any charges will be brought. Hell, it was probably just a mistake...simple negligence.
But, it may well cost him an ass-chewing and a down mark on his next efficiency report. And, all it
takes is one bad report to knock a career all to hell.

My bet is it was a policy, not the decision of some poor 0-2 or GS-7
at DoD.

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:07:26 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:53:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:



There must be a couple of hundred lawyers heading for Texas right now.
Can a private citizen sue the Air Force or Department of Defense?

If so, this could cost the government millions upon millions if not more.


Maybe. https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...TCA-29705.html

That sort of comes back to the line that you need to get permission
from the government to sue them based on this (from your article)

"Once you have gone through the procedures listed above -- a process
known as "exhausting your administrative remedies" -- you are eligible
to file a lawsuit in court to pursue money damages from the
government". Basically they get to say when you have exhausted all
administrative remedies and they define what that procedure is.

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:17:21 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:07:26 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:53:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:



There must be a couple of hundred lawyers heading for Texas right now.
Can a private citizen sue the Air Force or Department of Defense?

If so, this could cost the government millions upon millions if not more.


Maybe. https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...TCA-29705.html

That sort of comes back to the line that you need to get permission
from the government to sue them based on this (from your article)

"Once you have gone through the procedures listed above -- a process
known as "exhausting your administrative remedies" -- you are eligible
to file a lawsuit in court to pursue money damages from the
government". Basically they get to say when you have exhausted all
administrative remedies and they define what that procedure is.

Thus the word 'maybe'.

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:50:11 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:01:19 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 09:35:13 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 08:55:17 -0500, John H
wrote:

...who let that slip through the cracks.

"The Air Force also acknowledged that it had failed to transmit information about Kelley’s
conviction to the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC) system, a U.S. government data bank
used by licensed firearms dealers to check prospective gun buyers for criminal backgrounds."

http://tinyurl.com/yclpllx3


===

Like most governmental CFs it will probably turn out to be the fault
of organizational leadership faulure. I'd be really surprised if any
one individual is charged with negligence, and I'd also bet that they
will find a lot of other lapses.


Oh, I doubt any charges will be brought. Hell, it was probably just a mistake...simple negligence.
But, it may well cost him an ass-chewing and a down mark on his next efficiency report. And, all it
takes is one bad report to knock a career all to hell.

My bet is it was a policy, not the decision of some poor 0-2 or GS-7
at DoD.

I'm thinking if the AF acknowledged a failure, it wasn't policy.

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 15:14:54 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:17:21 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 13:07:26 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:53:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:



There must be a couple of hundred lawyers heading for Texas right now.
Can a private citizen sue the Air Force or Department of Defense?

If so, this could cost the government millions upon millions if not more.


Maybe. https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...TCA-29705.html

That sort of comes back to the line that you need to get permission
from the government to sue them based on this (from your article)

"Once you have gone through the procedures listed above -- a process
known as "exhausting your administrative remedies" -- you are eligible
to file a lawsuit in court to pursue money damages from the
government". Basically they get to say when you have exhausted all
administrative remedies and they define what that procedure is.

Thus the word 'maybe'.

I think that is why most suits against the federal government are
about policy, not damages.

About 25 years ago we had a guy who was suing EPA over a land use
issue, claiming an uncompensated "taking". In the end the feds said he
had not exhausted all of his remedies until he sued the county
although it was a federal wet lands law involved and an EPA ruling.
In the end it made it all the way to the SCOTUS who let the lower
court ruling stand and he got $22 million from the county for not
being able to build on his 40 acres. He gave it up for $100 as part of
the judgement.