• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What could the FBI done had they received a tip on Cruz?

Vetplus40

Vetplus40

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2017
Messages
4,592
Reaction score
2,283
Location
South Western Mississippi
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is a very emotional subject to say the least. I dare say few if any on DP have ever personally experienced anything close to it. I have had two of these occur near where I live and I can tell you that the impacts are lasting.

That being said, while there is certainly a level of justifiable anger aimed towards the FBI because information about Cruz did not reach the Miami Field Office, I think that they may be a bit of emotionally based misunderstanding that such a tip WOULD have prevented this tragedy from occurring.

Yes, the FBI would have questioned Cruz as a result of this tip, and yes such questioning MIGHT have deterred him, but it may not have either. However, there is no provision that I am aware of that would have allowed the FBI to simply knock on Cruz's door and handcuff him as a result of this tip. As I understand it, he had no outstanding "wants or warrants" and he LEGALLY purchased his weapons. As such, he would have been guilty of NOTHING at the time he would have been questioned as a result of this tip.

This post is not intended to start a "flame war" on guns, so please don't take it there. My main issue is that while the FBI deserves some criticism for their procedural error of some sort (yet to be determined), I am not convinced that they are to blame either.

Other may have a different take and I am certainly interested in hearing what other "logical" and "respectable" opinions others have on the subject.
 
They would have kept investigating for another few years and when he did commit a mass murder they'd only know when the local Sheriff's called them.

The FBI investigates down to the smallest detail, then lays a perjury trap on some poor schmuck to fill in the gaps. They didn't even get that far.

My opinion of the FBI is it's as worthless as tits on a bull if you want an answer in this lifetime.

I think we should stop worshiping the FBI, and let ATF handle things like this. They at least have a sense of urgency.
 
Vetplus40 said:
This is a very emotional subject to say the least. I dare say few if any on DP have ever personally experienced anything close to it. I have had two of these occur near where I live and I can tell you that the impacts are lasting.

That being said, while there is certainly a level of justifiable anger aimed towards the FBI because information about Cruz did not reach the Miami Field Office, I think that they may be a bit of emotionally based misunderstanding that such a tip WOULD have prevented this tragedy from occurring.

Yes, the FBI would have questioned Cruz as a result of this tip, and yes such questioning MIGHT have deterred him, but it may not have either. However, there is no provision that I am aware of that would have allowed the FBI to simply knock on Cruz's door and handcuff him as a result of this tip. As I understand it, he had no outstanding "wants or warrants" and he LEGALLY purchased his weapons. As such, he would have been guilty of NOTHING at the time he would have been questioned as a result of this tip.

This post is not intended to start a "flame war" on guns, so please don't take it there. My main issue is that while the FBI deserves some criticism for their procedural error of some sort (yet to be determined), I am not convinced that they are to blame either.

Other may have a different take and I am certainly interested in hearing what other "logical" and "respectable" opinions others have on the subject.
Click to expand...

The local LEOs had multiple (39?) prior contacts with this "weird guy" and the local school "officials" had invoked multiple susupensions/expulsions and yet no "red flag" (criminal conviction or mental defect adjudication) was placed into the NICS BGC system. Attempts to shift blame to federal LEOs (FBI or BATFE) or the lack of national "gun control" laws are just a smoke screen - this remains a state/local problem which requires a state/local solution. Simply hoping that the next Floriduh "weird kid" will grow out of, rather than grow into, an escalation of violence was and still is moronic as is expecting the feds to handle them.
 
how many tips do they get a day? hundreds? thousands? how many tragedies does the FBI prevent that we never even hear about? i'll bet that number is significant, if not overwhelming.

basically, some people are violent, and a portion of these violent people are insane. throw in almost unfettered access to instruments of war, and it's no wonder that there's a mass shooting every week. blaming the FBI for this seems pretty ridiculous.
 
I suppose it would depend on the kind of tip?

What was said and who said it?

I am not familiar with how the process works....is there a vetting process to prevent things like SWATing?
 
Vetplus40 said:
This is a very emotional subject to say the least. I dare say few if any on DP have ever personally experienced anything close to it. I have had two of these occur near where I live and I can tell you that the impacts are lasting.

That being said, while there is certainly a level of justifiable anger aimed towards the FBI because information about Cruz did not reach the Miami Field Office, I think that they may be a bit of emotionally based misunderstanding that such a tip WOULD have prevented this tragedy from occurring.

Yes, the FBI would have questioned Cruz as a result of this tip, and yes such questioning MIGHT have deterred him, but it may not have either. However, there is no provision that I am aware of that would have allowed the FBI to simply knock on Cruz's door and handcuff him as a result of this tip. As I understand it, he had no outstanding "wants or warrants" and he LEGALLY purchased his weapons. As such, he would have been guilty of NOTHING at the time he would have been questioned as a result of this tip.

This post is not intended to start a "flame war" on guns, so please don't take it there. My main issue is that while the FBI deserves some criticism for their procedural error of some sort (yet to be determined), I am not convinced that they are to blame either.

Other may have a different take and I am certainly interested in hearing what other "logical" and "respectable" opinions others have on the subject.
Click to expand...

Umm...the FBI was given the tip and warned about Cruz.

F.B.I. Was Warned of Florida Suspect’s Desire to Kill but Did Not Act
FBI got tip on alleged Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz in January, but didn’t ‘follow protocols’
Florida shooting: FBI admits it failed to investigate Nikolas Cruz tipoff

That protocol was not followed is their fault pure and simple. So, you ask, "What could the FBI done?" Follow protocol for starters.
 
Helix said:
how many tips do they get a day? hundreds? thousands? how many tragedies does the FBI prevent that we never even hear about? i'll bet that number is significant, if not overwhelming.

basically, some people are violent, and a portion of these violent people are insane. throw in almost unfettered access to instruments of war, and it's no wonder that there's a mass shooting every week. blaming the FBI for this seems pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The sheer volume of tips received is likely overwhelming at times. Sadly, the issue is going to be "politicized" on two fronts. First, on gun control. Secondly, the Trump supporters will try and tie it to their "Anti-FBI" crusade that has more to do with trying to protect Trump than it does at looking at the tragedy itself.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Umm...the FBI was given the tip and warned about Cruz.

F.B.I. Was Warned of Florida Suspect’s Desire to Kill but Did Not Act
FBI got tip on alleged Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz in January, but didn’t ‘follow protocols’
Florida shooting: FBI admits it failed to investigate Nikolas Cruz tipoff

That protocol was not followed is their fault pure and simple. So, you ask, "What could the FBI done?" Follow protocol for starters.
Click to expand...

The OP title was OBVIOUSLY truncated due to character allotment. If you read the entire post, it should have been clear that the question was; is blaming the FBI for not preventing the tragedy fair? I readily stated that their protocol was not followed, so that is an "understood".

Now since you "chimed in" on a post that you OBVIOUSLY did not understand to begin with, please answer the following:

Exactly what protocol wasn't followed? Be specific please.

What would have been the outcome had this protocol been followed?
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
That protocol was not followed is their fault pure and simple. So, you ask, "What could the FBI done?" Follow protocol for starters.
Click to expand...

What's the outcome of the protocol? Would they have been able to take his weapons and/or lock him up had it been followed?
 
Vetplus40 said:
Which would have been what?

Which would have resulted in what?
Click to expand...

How do laws prevent mentally ill people from buying guns?

Under federal law, a person can be tallied in a database and barred from purchasing or possessing a firearm due to a mental illness under two conditions: if he is involuntarily committed to a mental hospital, or if a court or government body declares him mentally incompetent.
Click to expand...

Read the rest of the article for a bit more detail.
 
Last edited:
Greenbeard said:
What's the outcome of the protocol? Would they have been able to take his weapons and/or lock him up had it been followed?
Click to expand...

Considering his history? Yes, they more than likely would have been able to take his weapons away at the very least. Put him in a mental institution at the most.

This is a failure on our enforcement system. Both local LEO's and Federal LEO's failed Cruz and those students. There is a system in place to stop people like Cruz. It wasn't used.
 
Kal'Stang said:
How do laws prevent mentally ill people from buying guns?



Read the rest of the article for a bit more detail.
Click to expand...


Sorry bud. Try again. Cruz had NOT YET committed a crime. He wasn't proven to be mentally ill. Are you not innocent until proven guilty in this country? He ALREADY legally purchased his guns.

Here is a simple test of your "illogical" logic: Find a law enforcement official in your community. Tell him that you plan on speeding later this afternoon and would he go ahead and write you a ticket to save you the hassle of being pulled over later? Be sure to tell him that you have already been cited for speeding several times and have a chronic "lead foot". He will likely look at you like you are "nuts", but he can't write you a ticket. Why? Because you have not yet committed a speeding violation. Talking about it is not a crime.
 
Vetplus40 said:
This is a very emotional subject to say the least. I dare say few if any on DP have ever personally experienced anything close to it. I have had two of these occur near where I live and I can tell you that the impacts are lasting.

That being said, while there is certainly a level of justifiable anger aimed towards the FBI because information about Cruz did not reach the Miami Field Office, I think that they may be a bit of emotionally based misunderstanding that such a tip WOULD have prevented this tragedy from occurring.

Yes, the FBI would have questioned Cruz as a result of this tip, and yes such questioning MIGHT have deterred him, but it may not have either. However, there is no provision that I am aware of that would have allowed the FBI to simply knock on Cruz's door and handcuff him as a result of this tip. As I understand it, he had no outstanding "wants or warrants" and he LEGALLY purchased his weapons. As such, he would have been guilty of NOTHING at the time he would have been questioned as a result of this tip.

This post is not intended to start a "flame war" on guns, so please don't take it there. My main issue is that while the FBI deserves some criticism for their procedural error of some sort (yet to be determined), I am not convinced that they are to blame either.

Other may have a different take and I am certainly interested in hearing what other "logical" and "respectable" opinions others have on the subject.
Click to expand...

It's obvious that the FBI and local police both failed in this case.

They should have, first of all, identified him. They didn't even try.

Then they could have talked to him and assessed his mental state. This talk would have given them grounds for a mental health evaluation which would have led to counseling.

At some point his access to guns might have been revoked.

He may have been committed to a mental hospital.

But......what actually happened was nothing because the FBI didn't even try to find him. FBI......they have blood on their hands.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The local LEOs had multiple (39?) prior contacts with this "weird guy" and the local school "officials" had invoked multiple susupensions/expulsions and yet no "red flag" (criminal conviction or mental defect adjudication) was placed into the NICS BGC system. Attempts to shift blame to federal LEOs (FBI or BATFE) or the lack of national "gun control" laws are just a smoke screen - this remains a state/local problem which requires a state/local solution. Simply hoping that the next Floriduh "weird kid" will grow out of, rather than grow into, an escalation of violence was and still is moronic as is expecting the feds to handle them.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and yet he was able to legally purchase a powerful weapon. How insane is that?

But, rather than bash law enforcement, local or not, why not use this example as a lesson and see if future mass shootings can be prevented? Nothing can change the past, but the future can be made better.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Considering his history? Yes, they more than likely would have been able to take his weapons away at the very least. Put him in a mental institution at the most.

This is a failure on our enforcement system. Both local LEO's and Federal LEO's failed Cruz and those students. There is a system in place to stop people like Cruz. It wasn't used.
Click to expand...

If his past legal history was any issue, then he couldn't have bought the guns to start with. Or if he could have, then the fault lies within the gun laws in Florida and not the FBI. Basically, you are trying to "reverse engineer" an argument that you cannot win.

Now, please quote me the legal statute that would have allowed the FBI to lock up Cruz based on a tip. Because, unless he was actually locked up, there would be no way to FULLY ensure that his crime would not have been committed.
 
Vetplus40 said:
Sorry bud. Try again. Cruz had NOT YET committed a crime. He wasn't proven to be mentally ill. Are you not innocent until proven guilty in this country? He ALREADY legally purchased his guns.

Here is a simple test of your "illogical" logic: Find a law enforcement official in your community. Tell him that you plan on speeding later this afternoon and would he go ahead and write you a ticket to save you the hassle of being pulled over later? Be sure to tell him that you have already been cited for speeding several times and have a chronic "lead foot". He will likely look at you like you are "nuts", but he can't write you a ticket. Why? Because you have not yet committed a speeding violation. Talking about it is not a crime.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article I provided? You don't need to commit a crime to be judged mentally unstable and/or a danger to society. That was shown in just the part I quoted from the article alone. If you're going to ask questions then at the very least attempt to understand what is being told you before jumping to conclusions based on things that were not said but instead were based on preconceived notions.
 
Vetplus40 said:
Other may have a different take and I am certainly interested in hearing what other "logical" and "respectable" opinions others have on the subject.
Click to expand...

This conversation is going to go all kinds of sideways...

Our real issue is what the FBI did not do, even if it is still reasonable to say that if the FBI had followed every protocol they still might not have stopped this. We can consider that questioning might have made it for some intervention, perhaps going so far as to charge him with something involving the threats made through social media. That might be a stretch but still we have a real issue with what the FBI is for in these cases.

Makes it a bit difficult to exist in the what-ifs.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Exactly, and yet he was able to legally purchase a powerful weapon. How insane is that?

But, rather than bash law enforcement, local or not, why not use this example as a lesson and see if future mass shootings can be prevented? Nothing can change the past, but the future can be made better.
Click to expand...

I ask again, what had Cruz been convicted of?
 
Vetplus40 said:
If his past legal history was any issue, then he couldn't have bought the guns to start with. Or if he could have, then the fault lies within the gun laws in Florida and not the FBI. Basically, you are trying to "reverse engineer" an argument that you cannot win.

Now, please quote me the legal statute that would have allowed the FBI to lock up Cruz based on a tip. Because, unless he was actually locked up, there would be no way to FULLY ensure that his crime would not have been committed.
Click to expand...

There is nothing to reverse engineer. :shrug: The LEO's failed pure and simple to follow protocol. FBI even admitted to that. That you wish to ignore that is your fault. Not mine.
 
Vetplus40 said:
I ask again, what had Cruz been convicted of?
Click to expand...

Conviction implies that a crime happened. Your question implies that one must have a criminal conviction to be judged mentally unstable or to be considered as a danger to society. That is wrong. As I've already shown you via link to a CNN article.
 
OrphanSlug said:
This conversation is going to go all kinds of sideways...

Our real issue is what the FBI did not do, even if it is still reasonable to say that if the FBI had followed every protocol they still might not have stopped this. We can consider that questioning might have made it for some intervention, perhaps going so far as to charge him with something involving the threats made through social media. That might be a stretch but still we have a real issue with what the FBI is for in these cases.

Makes it a bit difficult to exist in the what-ifs.
Click to expand...

I agree. Being able to arrest somebody for social media threats may be warranted in certain cases, but that is an issue for those that make the laws, not for those that simply enforce the laws. That said, we definitely need to know why protocol was not followed in any regard.

My concern is that the FBI gets "trashed" unjustifiably in Florida, because of the "political" and unrelated Trump investigation. Yes, the FBI is at fault for not following procedure, but I am yet unconvinced that their protocol failure would have prevented this tragedy.
 
Vetplus40 said:
I agree. Being able to arrest somebody for social media threats may be warranted in certain cases, but that is an issue for those that make the laws, not for those that simply enforce the laws. That said, we definitely need to know why protocol was not followed in any regard.

My concern is that the FBI gets "trashed" unjustifiably in Florida, because of the "political" and unrelated Trump investigation. Yes, the FBI is at fault for not following procedure, but I am yet unconvinced that their protocol failure would have prevented this tragedy.
Click to expand...

One could say the same thing about how they failed to act when their Minneapolis office reported suspicious Muslim activities in getting flight training......thus failing to stop 9-11.

Face it.....Trump is right about the FBI.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Conviction implies that a crime happened. Your question implies that one must have a criminal conviction to be judged mentally unstable or to be considered as a danger to society. That is wrong. As I've already shown you via link to a CNN article.
Click to expand...

My "question" implied nothing of the sort. This discussion is NOT about mental health.

That said, you haven't "shown me anything" related to my OP. You are simply "dancing" and trying to factor in an argument about mental health or mental stability. None of which fall with in the purview of the FBI. The FBI is a law enforcement/investigative agency. They are not mental health professionals.

Now, getting back on topic: Provide me the statute that shows where the FBI could have locked up Cruz based on a tip that they received (had protocol been followed) or handcuffed him for any other LEGAL reason. Thus guaranteeing that he would not have committed this crime.
 
Vox said:
One could say the same thing about how they failed to act when their Minneapolis office reported suspicious Muslim activities in getting flight training......thus failing to stop 9-11.

Face it.....Trump is right about the FBI.
Click to expand...

Trump couldn't be more wrong. He is the same guy who "praised" the FBI after the Weiner emails surfaced. Trump is simply an opportunist.

Now, back to the OP.
 
Vetplus40 said:
I agree. Being able to arrest somebody for social media threats may be warranted in certain cases, but that is an issue for those that make the laws, not for those that simply enforce the laws. That said, we definitely need to know why protocol was not followed in any regard.

My concern is that the FBI gets "trashed" unjustifiably in Florida, because of the "political" and unrelated Trump investigation. Yes, the FBI is at fault for not following procedure, but I am yet unconvinced that their protocol failure would have prevented this tragedy.
Click to expand...

It is going to happen, it already has happened. It is sad but true, politics stepped in before the first funeral was done. The left immediately renewed the never ending 2nd Amendment debate, and the right jumped on the FBI/Department of Justice.

We agree though, I am uncertain that FBI following every protocol would have prevented this. It might, but we cannot be for sure even if the politics of the matter pretends they can know for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom