Those cows all gone yet? Okay, let's close the barn door...

[Goofball]

Wow. Deciding not to allow mentally disturbed individuals buy guns. What a novel concept...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18398341/

[drone]

Here's a link with some more info:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/30/AR2007043000556.html

Kaine said his executive order clarifies existing law.

In 2005, the General Assembly changed the criteria under which state officials had to report a patient to the central criminal records database.

Under the old law, a person was to be reported to the database if had been declared mentally ill, dangerous and had been "committed to a hospital." Starting in October 2005, the word "hospital" was replaced with "facility."

Cho,23, was declared mentally ill in December 2005 after being evaluated at the New River Community Services in Blacksburg, causing some to argue he should have been covered under the law even if he received outpatient services.

But when he filled out his application to purchase his weapons, Cho checked that he had never been ordered to seek mental counseling.

"In the future, people who lie on forms will be caught," Kaine said.
Virginia actually has fairly sane laws on gun ownership, and enforces them pretty well. Note the timing of Cho's gun purchases, he had to wait 1 month in between due to a handgun law passed several years back. This was to prevent people from buying a bunch of guns all at once and taking them across the river to DC and selling them illegally there. Buy 1 gun a month, it's the law! ~D

[Xiahou]

That's a huge loophole. Good thing it's closed- too bad it wasn't closed sooner.

You would have to think that when they originally cooked up those laws they didn't contemplate a man who's declared 'a danger to himself or others' would be released for outpatient care. However, in today's world, it's apparently normal for dangerous psychotics to be released untreated and allowed to roam at will.

Closing the loophole is one way of handling it, another way would be to actually commit people who are legally determined to be mentally unstable and dangerous to society.

[Don Corleone]

If I recall, the end of institutionalization had more to do with economic reasons then libertarian ones. State run institutions are a huge load to shoulder, economically speaking. It all started in the early 80's... the federal government quit sending subsidies to state run mental facilities, which then closed. That's also the reason for the large increase in the numbers of chronically homeless in the 80's (not that there weren't homeless people in the 70s and earlier).

In any case, I'm all for background checks. If I remember correctly, the NRA offered to fund a national one for all jurisdictions in the country. The only stipulation they placed was that the information on purchases could not be used in future seizures, should the state laws on gun ownership change down the road. Unfortunately, because they wanted to reserve the right do just that, most state governments turned the NRA down.

[Goofball]

Question: What happens in Virginia if I already own guns, then am judged to be a danger to myself or others and ordered to undergo psychiatric treatment. Since under the new system my name would then be entered into the "crazy database," would the legal system then put two and two together and send a friendly neighborhood police officer to confiscate the guns I already own, or would I just be prevented from buying more guns and allowed to keep the ones I have?

[Xiahou]

If I recall, the end of institutionalization had more to do with economic reasons then libertarian ones. State run institutions are a huge load to shoulder, economically speaking. It all started in the early 80's... the federal government quit sending subsidies to state run mental facilities, which then closed. That's also the reason for the large increase in the numbers of chronically homeless in the 80's (not that there weren't homeless people in the 70s and earlier).I was going to suggest that we then do the same with convicted felons as well- since the government doesn't mind letting known dangerous persons loose on the street to save a few bucks. But then, I guess we already do, huh? :sweatdrop:


Question: What happens in Virginia if I already own guns, then am judged to be a danger to myself or others and ordered to undergo psychiatric treatment. Since under the new system my name would then be entered into the "crazy database," would the legal system then put two and two together and send a friendly neighborhood police officer to confiscate the guns I already own, or would I just be prevented from buying more guns and allowed to keep the ones I have?
Well, this could vary by state but.... I don't think the state is supposed to have any way of knowing if you have a gun or not- there is no registry (in theory anyhow). Therefore, they don't know whether or not someone has a gun if they're committed, convicted ect. However, I believe if the authorities discover that you own guns and legally are not able to, they will confiscate them.

[rory_20_uk]

A country where there is no check that will even pick up known mentally ill patients! It's amazing there are so few massacres.

So thanks to the timely closing of this gaping error, people now need to either lie or get their friends to get the guns. Well problem solved!! :thumbsup:

~:smoking:

[drone]

From an earlier WaPo article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/24/AR2007042402524.html

Virginia is relatively aggressive in reporting mental health records to the federal system that gun sellers use for background checks of potential buyers. Virginia was the first state to develop a system to provide background checks for firearms purchases -- four years before the 1993 federal Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act set up the national system.

But the Brady system relies on states to send criminal and mental health records to the FBI database. As a result of lawsuits, the federal government cannot mandate that states do so. In 2003, Virginia began voluntarily reporting mental health records to the FBI's national instant background check system. Only 22 states provide such records. Since then, Virginia has reported more than 80,000 mental health records to the FBI, more than any other state.
Virginia is very much a pro-gun state, I think this makes the state even more willing to push for responsible ownership and do what they can within the federal restrictions.

People who already own guns but then go nuts probably fall through the cracks. Felons would be required to give them up.

[TevashSzat]

I remember something about the counterargument made to restricting mentally ill people from buying guns.

The People with Mental Health Association or something along the lines of that says that they believe that everyone has a right to bear arms and that just because someone has mental health problems, it is not necessarily a prediction of their future actions. They wish people with mental diseases be treated equally as everyone else and to restrict them from having access to weapons is discrimination.

[KukriKhan]

... it is not necessarily a prediction of their future actions...

Aha! The crux appears.