Let's Close The Loophole!

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Vikingdad, Jan 3, 2013.

  1. Vikingdad

    Vikingdad New Member

    14,922
    0
    0
    I'm talking about the mental health loophole which allows people who have been deemed to be of insufficient mental ability to be able to purchase/possess firearms. I am not sure where to locate the facts/links, but as I understand it when a purchaser undergoes the background check the check does not have full access to mental health records nationwide.

    What say you all?
     
  2. dog2000tj

    dog2000tj New Member

    8,176
    2
    0
    in my teens I was labeled a danger to myself and others by a psychiatrist. He stated to my parents that he felt I was an immediate danger and should be committed. If it weren't for my father he may have succeeded.

    To date I have never assaulted anyone and have not killed myself :cool:


    All these so-called crazy mass killers have 1 thing in common ... they all exhibited signs that were either ignored or played down. Why don't folks start enforcing the laws that are already on the books that are there to deal with these issues and stop trying to reinvent the wheel with new laws every time one of these nuts goes off :cool:
     

  3. CrazedJava

    CrazedJava New Member

    848
    0
    0
    There really is no reliable check on mental health. As it was stated, there are usually signs but people ignore them thanks to political correctness and our naturally non-confrontational nature.
     
  4. Mosin

    Mosin Well-Known Member

    7,459
    384
    83
    I deplore the idea. Once you open THAT can if worms, who knows where it will lead...

    Depressed because your husband died and you needed something to sleep? Banned.

    PTSD because you fought for your nation and sought treatment? Banned.

    This will only serve to keep people from seeking mental health care, out of fear that it will erode their liberties.
     
  5. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    Agreed, people can't even develop a universal IQ test so testing for mental health is junk science. No one can predict the operation of someone elses mind. Besides, how many people have 'cheated' on a test?

    I think trying to incorporate psychological testing into the BC system is going to be a slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? If a guy goes to a therapist for marital advice, what's to stop him from getting lumped in with the people who are truly mentally disturbed?

    Why would we want to give a doctor the power to decide whether or not someone is capable of owning a firearm by the simple stroke of a pen?

    As it is, to be disqualified you have to be adjudicated by a court which is fair...I guess...but giving a single person (Dr.) the power to decide one's mental health status can and will be disasterous...

    Medical records are kept private for very good reasons, to try to make them accessible is a huge violation of civil rights...(never thought I'd actually agree with the ACLU...:eek:)

    While I wholeheartedly agree with the fact that someone who need prozac or tapizol just to function, probably isn't stable enough to be a level headed, responsible gun owner, but rights cannot be denied just because someone 'might' do something evil with them.

    Humans have free will, not even God himself can stop that nevermind new laws...
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2013
  6. Mosin

    Mosin Well-Known Member

    7,459
    384
    83
    How many crazy people are there really? Waiting to snap?
    I see more CCW and an end to gun free zones (puke) clearing up the whole mental health issue in a few years...
     
  7. charlesmar

    charlesmar New Member

    109
    0
    0
    Hmmm.


    I am the most docile person you could ever know. Strong to the core, but never hit anyone, ever,

    That said, I went without help for depression for many many years, because I did not want it on record that I had any issue at all.

    I take antidepressants, and I am not alone.

    That said, I could see them playing this card to strip folks of rights. Especially since a huge percentage of the populous takes anti deps.
     
  8. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    The world Socialist and Communist movement has and does use the mental health threat as a weapon. In Russia an enemy can be locked up for ever without a trial.
    The Left Wing will embrace this mental check in the new Obama and Biden gun ban. This will be followed by a Federal mandated mental test for every gun owner.
     
  9. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    To close that "loophole" would also mean banning private sales without background checks. It would require going to an FFL or police agency to perform the check. I don't see much support for that on this board.
     
  10. Vikingdad

    Vikingdad New Member

    14,922
    0
    0
    Well. That went over like a lead balloon.

    My idea was to ID people adjudicated mentally incompetent. Of course that could be abused, but any restrictions have that danger. As it is a person can have a restraining order against them and have no say in it if they are not made aware of it. Or an abuse charge could be filed against them when nothing has happened. My thought was not a medical diagnosis alone but for a combination of medical and legal adjudication. Much in the same way as a convicted felon is prohibited but with the ability for a person to have the judgement reversed when their treatment has been successful.

    I figure that if we as gun owners don't have a viable alternative to offer in place of what Feinstein is proposing we have little chance of success.
     
  11. locutus

    locutus Well-Known Member Supporter

    16,729
    1,052
    113
    We had an alternative Nov.6 and we blew it.
     
  12. 1911love

    1911love New Member

    1,488
    0
    0
    I'm pretty sure if you are adjudicated mentally unfit it will get you denied on a nics check.
     
  13. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    Call me a hater, but the federal government can't even balance its budget; i don't think those people need any more duties/responsibilities until they have reached SOME REASONABLE LEVEL of competence in their current duties. IOW, i don't trust the feds to not screw this up into a system that is of use only to those who wish to abuse it (not to even mention what it would cost the taxpayers for them to eff it up).

    This is something that family should take care of whenever possible. Got a young adult dependent with mental issues and violent tendencies? Keep that youngster AWAY from firearms; alert the local police; perhaps participate in a VOLUNTARY registration process through the STATE court system to make a searchable record of the situation. In the event there is no family to care for/monitor the questionably sane person, THEN see that they meet with a state-appointed guardian who will explain that they aren't sane enough for firearms and have been precluded from using/owning/purchasing firearms until such time as they can demonstrate their fitness.

    Now obviously, any VOLUNTARY registration system for mentally-handicapped persons might be forgone by parents not wanting to stigmatize their child. One way to avoid that would be to make a mentally-handicapped person's guardian/parent statutorily responsible for that person's actions involving a firearm. For example, lil johnny bentabit shoots himself with his father's unsecured (on kitchen counter) pistol; courts charge his father with child neglect or negligent homicide. Another example, lil janie benttoomuch uses her mother's unsecured shotgun to attack a school and later to kill herself; her mother should face charges for both events.



    Personally, i am not a fan of restrictions on the 2A, but i am a fan of restricting mentally-handicapped people from hurting themselves and/or others.
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2013
  14. Vikingdad

    Vikingdad New Member

    14,922
    0
    0
    OK, this sounds a bit more along the line that I was hoping for.
     
  15. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    Most of the transfers that are held up is due to minor problems. I notice most of these are due to unpaid parking tickets. What makes someone a danger who has not paid an Urban rip off?
    Once power is given to these people they will abuse it. What makes anyone think giving Nancy more power will stop gun control. If I give the coyotes more sheep? Will the coyotes stop killing sheep and eat grass? :(
     
  16. Vikingdad

    Vikingdad New Member

    14,922
    0
    0
    Compared to what they are attempting? I would take getting held up in a background check over being held up for my guns.
     
  17. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    Viking Dad what kind of gun control should we ask for? :confused:
     
  18. Vikingdad

    Vikingdad New Member

    14,922
    0
    0
    I would prefer none at all. I am a firm believer in the theory that it is a problem with the people, not the guns. however I am also a realist and I know if we just sit down and say we will not tolerate any more gun control then the Pelosis out there will go full steam ahead right over top of us. It is better to have an alternative to what they are proposing when objecting to their proposals.

    What I would ask for is a solution to the real issue at hand which is criminal use of firearms in crimes. this does not and historically has not mean the that more restrictions are the answer, but that is what they are proposing.

    I would not object to Adam Lansa's mother being held accountable, but she is dead so that's not gonna work. I have not heard any of the specifics about the gun that was used in Oregon other than it was stolen from a friend. Should that friend be held accountable? I haven't got a clue. But I think it should be looked at. From what I do know that guy in Oregon was not obviously insane at least not until he shot up that mall. How could we as a nation be more proactive in finding these people out and getting them treatment before they go shoot up a shopping mall. problem is that there doesn't seem to be a way to make that determination in all cases (many of the ones that have occurred had ample warnings). There will be some nut cases that slip though. Fact is though that these whackos will do their mayhem with whatever tools they can if firearms are not available.
     
  19. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    Vikingdad there are lots of people responsible. His mother, him of course, the idiot politicians who denied the people in that school the right to defend themselves, anybody who voted for said politicians. Am I missing anyone?
     
  20. 1911love

    1911love New Member

    1,488
    0
    0
    You forgot the MSM Rjd.