Opinion: Here's an Easy Way to Improve Gun Safety ...

[spin]

Jan 31, 2011 – 5:00 AM

Since the Tucson, Ariz., tragedy, many people have renewed calls for more gun control measures. But there's already a perfectly good law on the books that could improve gun safety in this country right now. Congress, with the president's support, just needs to fully fund it.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/31/opinion-heres-an-easy-way-to-improve-gun-safety/

[formercia]

1. How are people determined to be mentally ill?

The Tucson shooter was acting strangely, but no Psychiatrist had certified him to a court as having a condition that would preclude him owning a gun. Everyone is sane until proven otherwise, regardless of how strange they may behave.

There were authorities trying to take my guns too because I disagreed with Bush Gang. To them I was crazy. Everyone knows Saddam had WMDs. I bought gun in spite of it and was never turned down, even though they tried.

So, be careful what you wish for.

[spin]

3. That's a good question ...

Hopefully this info will answer your concerns.

Q. Federal law prohibits people who are dangerously mentally ill from purchasing or possessing a gun. Does the NICS Act change who is covered by this prohibition?

A. No. The NICS Act does not change the prohibition enacted in 1968 that bars people who are dangerously mentally ill from purchasing or possessing a gun. Under federal law, people may not buy or possess a gun if they are “adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to any mental institution.” ATF regulations define “adjudicated as a mental defective” as a:

determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) Is a danger to himself or others; or (2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.

The NICS Act has not changed these regulations. It should be noted that merely seeking or receiving treatment for mental illness does not bring someone within this prohibited class.

The NICS Act does provide that persons who are entered into NICS because of this mental illness prohibition may seek “relief from disabilities” by petitioning that their names be removed from NICS if they no longer suffer from the mental health condition that originally barred them from buying or possessing guns.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/backgroundchecks/nics

[DissedByBush]

9. As usual, many mistakes

The college expelled him and told his parents they should refer him for treatment.

They failed to do so.

The college failed to refer him themselves.

Just as in Columbine there were multiple alarms going off that the shooter was psycho, but he slipped through all the cracks.

[old mark]

2. So by the OP's reasoning, people should be dissalowed form exercising their rights

because someone in authority does not approve of them, with no legal reason?

We had that system for many decades, and "gun crime" is DOWN since the "shall issue" laws became widespread.

Hard to believe, I know, especially if you don't care to learn facts...


mark

[spin]

4. This is not the "no fly" list ...

where the Bush administration placed Jim Moore's name because he was the first journalist who dared to ask W. about his National Guard record.

Political author's name matches name on terrorist watch list

August 14, 2008|By Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston CNN Special Investigations Unit

Four years ago, author James Moore released his latest book critical of President Bush."Bush's War for Re-election" was released in fall 2004 and raised questions about the president's service in the National Guard during the Vietnam War. The issue of Bush's service became a campaign issue during the 2004 presidential election.

Months later, on his first airline flight since the election, James Moore was told by the airline he was flying that his name matched a name on the government's terrorist watch list.
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-08-14/entertainment/author.terror.list_1_list-potential-terrorists-terrorist-screening-database?_s=PM:SHOWBIZ

There have been established guidelines since 1968 that disqualify people with dangerous mental illness from purchasing or possessing a firearm.

Q. Federal law prohibits people who are dangerously mentally ill from purchasing or possessing a gun. Does the NICS Act change who is covered by this prohibition?

A. No. The NICS Act does not change the prohibition enacted in 1968 that bars people who are dangerously mentally ill from purchasing or possessing a gun. Under federal law, people may not buy or possess a gun if they are “adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to any mental institution.” ATF regulations define “adjudicated as a mental defective” as a:

determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) Is a danger to himself or others; or (2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.

The NICS Act has not changed these regulations. It should be noted that merely seeking or receiving treatment for mental illness does not bring someone within this prohibited class.

The NICS Act does provide that persons who are entered into NICS because of this mental illness prohibition may seek “relief from disabilities” by petitioning that their names be removed from NICS if they no longer suffer from the mental health condition that originally barred them from buying or possessing guns.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/backgroundchecks/nics

[old mark]

7. And with good reason...but the shooter (alleged) in AZ had never been

found mentally ill by a doctor or a judge, which is THE legal criterion for denial of a weapon purchase...It can not be in the judgement of the police-or anyone else-because they think that guy is crazy.

FWIW, although I was of the opinion that the shooter was mentally ill, it seems that he did an awful lot of online research into the manifestaations of mental illness and legal consequences of what he planned. I worked in a psychiatric hospital for many years, and for more years previously with emotionally disturbed and addicted people, and there is no way I could say how that guy's mind was working at the moment of his crimes...much less to predict what someone will or won't do at some future time.

It is not the prohibition against certain persons havin gfirearms that I disagree with, it is the determination of who is appropriate and who is not by a politician of a police officer who migha have his own agenda.


mark

[spin]

12. Obviously there have to be safe guards ...

and even so there will always be cases where a politician or LEO oversteps his authority and makes a determination based more on revenge than fact. A process should be incorporated in the law to appeal such rulings. There is already a provision to petition the NICS to have a name removed once the individual no longer suffers from the mental condition.

The fact still remains when a person with a severe mental problem goes on a shooting spree, the anti-RKBA crowd gets a big boost and are able to promote their useless "feel good" laws such as banning extended magazines.

While it's true that improving the NICS background check will never eliminate all massacres, doing so will have a better chance of reducing such incidents than another assault weapons ban. These tragic shootings are very rare and if we can figure a way to make them rarer still, we may avert possible draconian gun control laws.

This may not be the best solution, but I haven't found anything better. I'm open to ideas.

[formercia]

5. First, they came for the Guns

and I said nothing

Because I had no guns.

......

[Atypical Liberal]

6. The "easy way" = poor money into it.

Sounds like they want to pour more money into the system. I'm not surprised at the resistance to do that. The fact of the matter is, the vast majority of background checks do nothing. You'd have to be an idiot to go and try to buy a gun through an FFL if you knew you were not able to buy one.

[old mark]

8. And therefor most criminals do not even attempt that- they buy from someone

else illegally or steal them, usually from relatives...It is NOT the people who are willing to obey the laws and jump through the hoops who are the problem...


mark

[YllwFvr]

10. Its a flawed system IMO

Ive purchased a rifle then the very next week been denied for a gun. Challenge the finding, was given a green light and bought the gun only to be denied again later. So out of the 7 or so checks ive had done ive failed two and had to go through the process of getting it figured out.

[X_Digger]

11. The gaps in NICS have to be filled.

Once the gaps are filled (all states enter existing disqualifying records in a timely manner), I'd like to see the BATFE pursue prosecution for perjury on some of the 'deny' transactions.

It's a felony to lie on the 4473. Only 4% of such 'deny' transactions are ever investigated and prosecuted.