The loudest gun-rights advocate in the Legislature, Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, also is leading the way on a smart gun-control bill that cleared the Senate this week on a 39-0 vote. It would align Kansas law with federal law in barring anyone who has been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital from possessing a firearm after release and, most important, requiring that the names of those committed to mental hospitals after July 1998 be entered into state and federal law enforcement databases. “No matter where they go in the country, they can’t buy a gun from a dealer,” Journey said. That only makes sense. Also key: A court could restore the person’s right to own a gun if he no longer poses a risk to himself or others.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Daniel on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
24 Comments
Uh oh! Ya hear that Ian? Looks like they’re a fixin to takes yer boomsticks away, feller!ROTFLMAO!!!
The fact that I am racially aware and proud actually proves that I am extremely mentally healthy. I ain’t givin’ up a dang one of my shootin’ irons!
Viva La America Blanco!!
Right on, Crusader! Love it!
There are plenty of mentally ill folks who’ve never been involuntarily committed to psyche treatment. In fact, most of them haven’t. Keeping someone’s name who has in a database for gun peddlers is a breach of confidentiality. This law would be unconstituiional. Just because someone’s mentally ill, that doesn’t make them a criminal. There are plenty of “average” citizens who have no business carrying a gun, Ian’s a good example of that.
This is just another example of how much ignorance there is about mental illness.
“A court could restore the person’s right to own a gun if he no longer poses a risk to himself or others.”Excuse me, but isn’t posing a risk to others the whole reason for packing heat?
Maybe this might have kept the shotgun out of Cheney’s hands.
Maybe this might have kept the shotgun out of Cheney’s hands.
Don’t let the crazies carry a gun? I’m ok with that, just as long as I get to carry one.
Bwhahahahahaha!!!!
X,If the crazies don’t have ‘em, why would you need one?
“I’m at peace with my lust, I can kill cuz in God I trust.” E. Vedder
Jed,ALL of the crazies haven’t been identified and locked up. There’s still a lot of them out running sround. Driven on Kellogg lately? (lol) Don’t worry about me, Jed. When the CCW law passes, I promise not to exceed my bag limit.
(Bwhahahahaha!)
Like I said before, there is so much ignorance when it comes to mental illness, that’s why people make jokes. If someone had a heart condition or diabetes, would their name be put into a database so others could discriminate against them? The brain can get sick just like any other organ in our body, and media only gives attention to mental illness when one or two who are afflicted do something outrageuos, reinforcing the sterotype. Most people who suffer from mental illness pose less of a threat to society than “normal” people, but you won’t see that in the news.
Da,Yes, I’m very much aware of your point. I have a friend who is schizophrenic, one of the most gentle and rational souls around, who writes really well thought out letters to the editor. I was married for 20 years to a spectacularly wonderful woman who suffered from bipolar disorder.These are not the people I refer to as crazy; I reserve that term for the ideocratic true believers!
44-year-old Jennifer Sanmarco, Goleta, Calif., shot up a a post office, this January. iPolice say Sanmarco shot six postal employees to death and committed suicide in what was believed to be the nation’s deadliest workplace shooting by a woman.The shooter had a long history of mental problems, officials said. She had been placed on a medical leave from her postal job for psychological problems. Yet she could get a gun. How safe are we in Kansas with such people running around with guns in their pockets when they can buy a high powered weapon and open up on innocent people without warning.How would all you gun-nuts fix that problem? She was probably “law-abiding” until the shooting took place. Would she qualify to carry a gun?
Otto, in Kansas, if she was that ill, we wouldnt give her a gun. We’d elect her AG.
Let’s face it, ANYONE who would take a gun and intentionally kill people has “mental problems”.Dennis Rader seemed like a normal, church going citizen until he was caught. How does one tell the difference between someone like him and someone “with a long history of mental problems”?
Support mental health or I’ll kill you :-)))
I have to agree with Phil, We need a Conceal and carry Fire Arms Bill to protect us from who or what ever may be out there. But that is not my main reason for supporting this bill. I feel and I am sure that Phil would agree, that we spend way too much money on training of Law Enforcement Officers. This bill has the possibility of saving millions of State Tax dollars. No more costly psychological evaluations to determine if the candid has the mental qualifications to perform the job. As long as they have not been committed to a mental hospital, what’s the problem? No more the requirement to spend hours qualifying and requalifying on the proficiency course. Why would you need to show that you could handle a firearm in the first place? All that is really needed is to pass the eight-hour safety course and they should be good for the rest of their career or life, which ever ends first. If they find themselves in a bad situation all they have to do is shoot first and after the smoke clears, claim that their lives were in danger. This would also allow us to fill every vacant law enforcement position in the State with little expense to tax payers. Training a police officer is very expensive and with this bill it only takes eight hours and $150.00.
grayfox,so in effect, you’re saying that we should run the risk of having psychologically unfit officers for the sake of saving some money?Problem: police officers carry guns and are entitled to use lethal force when deemed necessary. Now, if we forego the psychological tests, would you be comfortable with having some mentally unsound people slipping through the cracks? Would you trust a mentally unstable person with the responsibility of using lethal force? I know I sure as hell wouldn’t. Keep the psych-screening, we don’t need psycho police officers.
X, LOL! As a nurse who has worked in psychiatry for 20 yrs, BELIEVE me, there are plenty of psycho police officers!!Grayfox, love the sarcasim, good point!
CrusaderX You don’t get it, this new law allows anybody that has not been convicted of a felony or diagnosed with a mental illness to carry a firearm and if they feel threatened use deadly force to protect themselves. In case you did not understand that, they are authorized by law to KIL who ever they feel threatened by. These people do not have to any special training they just have to pass an eight-hour safety course and pay $150.00.
Oh, he was being sarcastic? My bad then.
There is a good editoral in today’s paper about this issue. Read it if you have the chance.