People give "security" too much credit, imo. I work in a secure-ish building where everyone (well, anyone not in uniform) is required to wear badges and have them visible at all times. Frankly speaking, I feel like all they do is allow the security detail to track your whereabouts because you have to scan to get into the building and then scan when you go between locked areas. The security people don't really scrutinize everyone coming/going (though it's entirely possible they're trained to do so but don't show they're doing it) and I think a lot of it is based on familiarity. You see these people 5 days a week and you get used to seeing them around.
I feel like that's what happened here. They saw he had a "valid" badge to get into the base (it beeped, gate raised, shrug), the security at the gate let him in because they recognized him as someone who had been working there previously, and because he had the proper credentials, he didn't get searched on going on. Hell, where I work, visitors have to go through a metal detector and have their belongings x-rayed. We just waltz through the door.
Still doesn't excuse the incredible and massive fail that is the apparent lack of a comprehensive background investigation (including psych eval) and what not for security clearance to get the job in the first place though.
Yeah, I work for a company that does business with the DOD (specifically DeCA). One of the guys I work with is a consultant that routinely visits the commisaries on base and has clearance and a badge to get on each base he visits. He and I were talking today and he said they just check his badge and wave him through. Granted his badge doesn't give him access to the flight lines, armories or other places like that. But it wouldn't be hard for him to smuggle some weapons on base and then go on some kind of rampage.
And according to this, the Seattle arrest was a charge of malicious mischief. Reading later through the story, it looks like he was never charged though. Even if he had been, it likely would have been a class 3 malicious mischief charge, which is a gross misdemeanor. That would have turned up on a background check but the arrest shouldn't have. And a misdemeanor conviction (apart from one involving domestic violence) is not a bar to owning guns either.
And the 2010 incident in Ft. Worth was hand-waved away by him saying that he was cleaning the gun and it accidentally discharged. I do blame the cops for that one. At the very least, they should have charged him with reckless endangerment or something like that. If his gun truly did discharge while cleaning, it was extremely careless and he deserved some kind of punishment for that.
His 2008 arrest in DeKalb County, Georgia was for disorderly conduct. He was kicked out of a bar for cursing and damaging some furnishings. He spent the night in jail and it ended up on a forgiveness bond.
So it appears to be a pattern of behavior emerging but the authorities from 2008 and 2010 had no knowledge of his prior behavior. And because only the 2008 arrest would have actually appeared on his record, I don't know if even the background check would have caught anything. Depending on how stringent the check is though-can they use arrests without charges as a factor? Even though in this particular case they should, you can't say in all cases they should.
I feel like that's what happened here. They saw he had a "valid" badge to get into the base (it beeped, gate raised, shrug), the security at the gate let him in because they recognized him as someone who had been working there previously, and because he had the proper credentials, he didn't get searched on going on. Hell, where I work, visitors have to go through a metal detector and have their belongings x-rayed. We just waltz through the door.
Still doesn't excuse the incredible and massive fail that is the apparent lack of a comprehensive background investigation (including psych eval) and what not for security clearance to get the job in the first place though.
Reply
And according to this, the Seattle arrest was a charge of malicious mischief. Reading later through the story, it looks like he was never charged though. Even if he had been, it likely would have been a class 3 malicious mischief charge, which is a gross misdemeanor. That would have turned up on a background check but the arrest shouldn't have. And a misdemeanor conviction (apart from one involving domestic violence) is not a bar to owning guns either.
And the 2010 incident in Ft. Worth was hand-waved away by him saying that he was cleaning the gun and it accidentally discharged. I do blame the cops for that one. At the very least, they should have charged him with reckless endangerment or something like that. If his gun truly did discharge while cleaning, it was extremely careless and he deserved some kind of punishment for that.
His 2008 arrest in DeKalb County, Georgia was for disorderly conduct. He was kicked out of a bar for cursing and damaging some furnishings. He spent the night in jail and it ended up on a forgiveness bond.
So it appears to be a pattern of behavior emerging but the authorities from 2008 and 2010 had no knowledge of his prior behavior. And because only the 2008 arrest would have actually appeared on his record, I don't know if even the background check would have caught anything. Depending on how stringent the check is though-can they use arrests without charges as a factor? Even though in this particular case they should, you can't say in all cases they should.
Reply
Leave a comment