To determine *what* someone bought would require talking to the people who sold it (Gunstore or private party who didn't do a FFL like they should). But, in theory (if we ignore legal standards for a moment), CBI could be able to say "xxx attempted to buy a gun two days ago at "store", and it was a long gun, and the background check was rejected/successful". Now, whether or not they should is another argument entirely, that's the extent of the data the gov't immediately has access to (e.g., CBI would not be able to say "it's a pump shotgun", because they don't have a clue.) Now, the only way electronic intercepts would put it together is if she bought it online in advance of coming to CO, or the most likely of all is if they looked at her card statements, saw a gun store, and went in and talked to them or something.
ETA: What I'm most suspicious of is she may have made credible threats online, in a way the gov't shouldn't have been able to associate with her real identity, so the gov't isn't in a position to explain that she made these threats, because it would beg the question how they know it was her.
ETA 2: And of course, the other possibility is that it is just the parents saying "Our daughter is interested in Columbine and went to CO" but then, the response would be incredibly and unjustifiably overblown.






Reply With Quote
