Skip to main content

View Diary: 2 New Executive Actions on Gun Background Checks (33 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  From what I can gather, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ericlewis0, MKSinSA, oldpotsmuggler

    they are looking at making mental health data available to the IBGC system.
    If that's only people who have already been adjudicated, that is a fraction of the potential applicants and not very full coverage AFA checking whether someone is mentally stable enough to be trusted with lethal weapons. I know several people just in my circle of acquaintances in my small town on the CT shoreline who have never crossed the line legally but should not be trusted with sharp objects, nevermind a gun. I'm not a mental health professional or law enforcement, I would never want to be in the position to make those decisions and I doubt that most of the people who are qualified would be comfortable passing that kind of judgement, either pro or con, without some very convincing demonstration. And that will leave a huge gap of people who are semi-Ok.
    As for

    re: registration and title transfer.  That doesn't mean that guns will suddenly not be available to gangsters
    No, not suddenly, but it would dry up the flow of new guns into the crime gun pipeline.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 01:10:19 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well, here's a clarification Via HuffPo (5+ / 0-)

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      The first proposed rule change, by the Department of Justice, expands the definition of the statutory term "committed to a mental institution" to clarify that the prohibition on firearms purchases applies to people subjected to involuntary outpatient as well as inpatient commitments.

      The rule also clarifies that “adjudicated as a mental defective” and “committed to a mental institution” include persons who are found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect; persons lacking mental responsibility or deemed insane; and persons found guilty but mentally ill, regardless of whether these determinations are made by a state, local, federal or military court.

      and
      The second proposed rule change, by the Department of Health and Human Services, allows certain entities covered by patient privacy protections to submit additional information to the background-check system. The administration notes that nothing in this rule would require reporting on general mental health visits or legally prevent someone from having a firearm just because he or she sought treatment.

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 01:39:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site