In the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, a gun-control debate is inevitable, as was reflected in an Eagle news article today about whether students should be able to carry guns. But Americans likely won’t have the debate we need.
A Slate article points out that gun-control advocates and opponents in Congress have focused of late on an assault-weapons ban, which centers on largely cosmetic aspects of firearms and likely won’t do anything to reduce violent crime.
What was proposed after the Columbine massacre but never passed, and what is still needed, is a law closing the legal loophole that allows private individuals to sell guns at gun shows without performing background checks on buyers.
Federally licensed dealers selling at those same shows already perform such checks. So why not have private transactions also covered in the law? It’s not a cure-all to gun violence, but a universal background check would close one glaring loophole that gives criminals an easy outlet for acquiring firearms.
What do responsible gun owners have to fear from this idea?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
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
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- Daniel on Too many exemptions
- BobChi on Let immigrants run
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- BobChi on Moore has had enough of House
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
139 Comments
Uhh Randy, the guns in question were purchased legally at a gun shop and registered to the perpetrator. Why tie the tragedy to guns show sales?
‘Responsible gun owners’ have neither the expertise nor the training to be put in a position where they are forced to be responsible for making a decision like that.
Requiring private party gun sales to go through background checks, etc. places a new level of due diligence on a sale transaction that is not present in other private party sales.
Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my car has a driver’s licenses and no DUI’s? Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my camcorder has no convictions for voyeurism? Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my computer is not Kevin Mitnik?
Randy
What littlejohn said.
The evil little bastard bought the Glock from a dealer, waited the 30 plus days and bought the Walther. Both transactions went through liscensed dealers, with background check. WTF!
How are the gun laws in D.C. working out? Howzabout passing laws against crazy bastards? (or saliva drooling anti-gun nuts) Might work just as well.
…shall not be infringed.
Insanity – again people change the debate
Why the law – because it closes a potential loop hole in the law, and tries to provide one more check to attempt to guarantee that crazies don’t get their hands on guns — Have a better idea?
“Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my car has a driver’s licenses and no DUI’s? Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my camcorder has no convictions for voyeurism? Do I have a duty to ensure that the person buying my computer is not Kevin Mitnik?”
No you don’t Brian – stay on topic it’s about guns, your right to have them and the rest of society’s right to make sure your not a lunatic with a gun.
Ken the topic is whether private indivduals should have a duty to investigate and determine if someone they sale something to should have it or not.
This ridiculous debate was sure to happen. First it was the schools fault for not locking down the campus after the first shooting. Had that happened the dead would be in the dorm instead of the classrooms. This tragedy should not frame some debate on gun control. Its a protected right in the Constitution to bear arms. As long as we live in a free society with firearms this will happen. Its part of the cost we all pay to live freely and bear arms. Its very simple, sometimes guns fall into the wrong hands.
Lock down the school? Are you joking? This isn’t some little vo-tech. This is a campus the size of a small city. Full of adults. We keep saying kids, but they are 99% 18+. Take a trip to Lawrence and tell us with a straight face how you would lock KU down.
Blaming this on the gun is like blaming 9-11 on the plane.
If it wasn’t a gun, it would have been a bomb. If not a bomb then it would have been a can of gasoline at 2am in the dorm. If not a fire it would have been a car plowing into a crowd. If not that then a hacksaw against the gas main.
This guy wasn’t thinking “hey, if I can’t get a gun then I guess I am out of luck”.
What next, blaming his shoes and the opposable thumb?
Until the background checks include – are you a whacked out individual – test, then it is fruitless.
Y’all – including WE – missed the bigger picture here. This kid was not a citizen. Should non-citizens be allowed to buy/own firearms in the US? Is there any other country that allows foreigners to carry firearms?
Sol where did you here he was not a citizen? He was one.
I have seen a number of reports indicating that this guy had both a documented history of mental problems and had also bee stalking women. It seems that with all that something should been enough of a red flag.
Sol, while you make a valid point about his being a legal resident alien I think the concerns would also go to citizens. In this guy’s case he had grown uo in Virginia; not Korea.
brian – he was not a citizen. He was a legal alien. (Green card I think)
It’s the lack of training in Virginia to buy guns there, a huge problem. Nothing is required.
“Law-abiding” don’t even get the needed qualifications. No one asks their judgment values, in a few questions. No eye sight test.
Drivers license requires some.
Gun show transactions are a sham, nothing reported at all. A business license is offered, state governments could demand back ground checks on their database criminal computers. That’s a policy, states could control.
If the state wants to continue with a federal background check just to be sure, they could do that.
It’s the state’s responsibility that a gun sale is being transacted between law abiding citizens.
Gun manufacturers allowed guns to be dumped in the street, so easy to get. Very easy to buy retail.
Children can shoot a gun, its so easy.
It’s harder for kids to drive a car, even if they could see over the steering wheel. Society demands get young people licensed to drive, teach them the responsibility.
Nothing is required in some states to own a gun, except age, be 18 or 21. No license is necessary.
Society is begging for responsible gun uses where innocent people don’t die.
The gun lobby supports non responsible people to own a gun. Ease their access to get one.
That’s a irresponsible industry corrupting politics.
The Amendment says right to bear arms, but government could control types of arms sold.
Limit arms sold, so they don’t end up dumped on the street.
Crates and crates of guns are being traded in the street straight from the manufactures.
Cho was a resident alien
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/law/jan-june07/cho_04-17.html
Am I mistaken, that said to me that he was not a citizen?
“Gun manufacturers allowed guns to be dumped in the street, so easy to get. Very easy to buy retail.”
How so?
“Crates and crates of guns are being traded in the street straight from the manufactures.”
That sounds terrible. Any more details on this absolutely horrible practice? It would be fasinating to hear more!
To respond a bit; Sol, Cho was a resident alien; he came, together with his family, to the United States at age 8. He apparently had not applied for naturalization, as had not his parents from my understanding.
Generally as to non-citizens purchasing weapons; the protections of the Constitution apply to (at least legal alien) non-citizens while residing in this country under SCOTUS jurisprudence. Thus, given the Second Amendment right that has oft been discussed, I would argue that a legal alien, as Cho, was entitled to purchase a weapon so long as he qualified to do so under the applicable statutes. I could, upon receipt of a suitable retainer, advance the legal argument that it would, in fact, be unlawful if not unconstitutional to differentiate between a citizen, native born or naturalized, and a legal resident alien insofar as the right to purchase of a firearm is concerned. Note that I do not claim the same status for illegal aliens; that is a different issue entirely.
The above is extremely shorthanded, and is woefully generalized and incomplete, as I am sure GMC will point out, if he so inclined.
> How so?
Corruption. That’s how so. Shipment paperwork is altered. Shipments are “stolen” but covered by insurance.
You don’t think police have found crates of guns from manufactures in some warehouse, or semi trucks ready to be transported? In a home. In some business that sells coffee or soap.
Business with no reason to have crates of guns.
Sure they have. Their stolen from the military too. No corruption in the military?
That’s what your suggesting. No corruption is possible that allows crates of guns to be on the street.
Sounds like someone is making up their ‘facts’ and you are buying it hook line and sinker.
Trying to regulate the sale of firearms from private individual to private individual would be like trying to nail Jello to a tree.
Gun shows cater mostly to collectors.
Collectors aren’t usually the sort that go on school shooting sprees.
The nut job purchased these guns from a dealer.
Maybe we should not sell to non-Americans, but that, too, would be circumvented by private sales.
Guns come over the border illegally – just as easy as drugs do.
Stop the illegals – maybe you can stop some of the illegal influx of cheap foreign-made handguns.
Arm the teachers.
That would have stopped the bastid in his tracks.
CNN reported that Cho had a hatred for ‘rich people.’ He may have stalked someone – and he had a history of mental problems.
Whoever said yesterday that this was a simple case of him ‘going off’ because his girlfriend found someone else – was wrong. He purchased these guns in advance and tried to remove the serial numbers.
This was a long time in planning.
What I’m still having a tough time believing is how all the students went “…quietly into that good night.”
Guns seem to be in a unique property category.
Is there anything else that can be bought legally from a private individual, but requires a background check (or something similar) when bought from a licensed dealer? Or anything else that can be sold legally by a person, at a profit, but when that person declares themselves to be a business and sells the same item at a profit they must get licensed?
Obviously the thing that is different with guns is the fact that they can kill people quickly and spontaneously.
The speed at which guns can be used is due to their nature (muzzleloaders are way out of fashion for criminals). The fear that most people have about guns is due to two factors: accidents and spontaneous violence. Accidents are accidents and can be largely prevented through access control and education for kids young adults.
Spontaneous gun violence is what most gun control laws are targeted at. We as a society want and need some assurance that Joe Crazy will not be able to stop and by a gun off the shelf on this way home after a bad day at work. That is why the gun purchase waiting period is often called the ‘cooling off period’.
We need to realize that it is next to impossible to prevent a planned, premeditated event, like the VT shooting was. In life, there is a certain degree of inherent risk.
Correct me if I’m wrong, as I’m sure someone will, but even if someone has a CC permit, wouldn’t the university, being a state institution, ban guns?
Arm the teachers…..he would have picked a dorm. Arm the students….he makes a bomb….can’t make a bomb….drives a car through a crowd. Come on people, where there is a will there is a way. Why can’t we accept this for what it is…..simple act of violence against innocent people.
Tuesday morning, a madman kills 32 people in Virginia with two handguns.
Wednesday morning, madmen kill 170 people in Baghdad with four car bombs.
I can’t find the words to convey what I’m trying to say, if anything.
As Farmie says: Jesus wept.
TDT, yes. This was the subject of some debate in the past, IIRC, by the Virginia House of Delegates, to bring this closer to the VPI incident.
Tusk,
You understand fake identity is all the rage now. How about “fake” people transport weapons or anything. That shipment is stolen.
How to join a gang or mob, commit a crime 101. Steal bulk shipments of anything.
People abandon their identity to create a crime. They get away and become someone else. They can alter their appereance. Gangs and mobs can use “fake” people.
Gee,
Remember Columbine, those guns were bought from a gun show.
States can regulate background checks at guns shows and they should.
States should demand can’t buy a new gun unless a question answered truthfully.
What happened to the other guns purchased. Does the buyer still own the guns. If not, who were they sold to.
Fill out some paperwork at least before buying more guns.
Gun stores should have the responsibility to get answers to those questions.
If a person lies on the paperwork, that’s criminal.
Why wouldn’t a law abiding person answer truthfully some answers?
Sheridan…..what happened to the “he’s a terroist” claim that you made yesterday? What about “he didn’t love America”. New day new angle eh?
GSheridan,
You said “What I’m still having a tough time believing is how all the students went ‘…quietly into that good night.’”
I sincerely hope you aren’t jumping on the vile “blame the victim” bandwagon as demonstrated with pitch perfect classlessness by John Derbyshire of National Review Online: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzllOTU0MDUzY2NhZDE2YmViYmRiNmE5ZjM1OWQxYTU=
“Spirit of Self-Defense – by John Derbyshire
As NRO’s [National Review Online] designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn’t anyone rush the guy? It’s not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness’ sake—one of them reportedly a .22.At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren’t very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can’t hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage—your chances aren’t bad.Yes, yes, I know it’s easy to say these things: but didn’t the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything? As the cliche goes—and like most cliches. It’s true—none of us knows what he’d do in a dire situation like that. I hope, however, that if I thought I was going to die anyway, I’d at least take a run at the guy.”
And just to prove that “The Derb” isn’t alone on the right in his revolting ruminations on whether the victims of this senseless crime were insufficiently “manly,” another right wing commentator backs him up with this: http://www.humanevents.com/rightangle/index.php?id=22093&title=where_were_the_men
“Like Derb, I don’t know if I would live up to this myself, but I know that I should be heartily ashamed of myself if I didn’t.”
I’m not sure I’ve read anything with less class than those comments above. To question the courage of innocent kids gunned down in their classrooms? That’s just sick.
GSheridan, I don’t know if that’s the direction you were heading, but it sure looks like it.
Typo
Why wouldn’t a law abiding person answer some questions.
I wonder if this thread is politicizing what happened at Columbine and VT?
To add to your point Condor, the Professor Librescu was heroic in his actions, blocking the door with his body to give the students time to flee out of the windows.
Mike – did, or did NOT Cho create terror?
I rest my case.
Not much yet Repub, not many people slinging around the ‘left wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘conservative, etc names yet.
Mrage, why wouldn’t a gun-seeking lawbreaker lie on some questions?
“If a person lies on the paperwork, that’s criminal.
Why wouldn’t a law abiding person answer truthfully some answers?”——————
Mrage – I agree – and the problem is NOT the law abiding citizens. Is it?
But Cho was ALREADY breaking the law by having the gun on campus. Do you really think he was going to abide by other laws?
The laws ONLY restrict the good people.
The criminals don’t give two hoots.
Ridiculous Sheridan….definition of terroism…..is defined by the US Department of Defense as “the unlawful use of — or threatened use of — force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives.”www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/teach/alqaeda/glossary.html
Please tell me what his political motivation was in your grand wisdom
GS – I really don’t think that just because a SINGLE person creates terror in another he can be called a terrorist. That definition would include rapists, serial killers, spree killers, or even thieves who are violent when they rob.
brian,
Everybody answers questions buying guns, creates a paper trail.
It might help prohibit some law breakers from buying guns. The signature can convict them even if its a fake name.
Law abiding people are happy right. No need to fear answering a few questions truthfully.
Mike, I don’t care what the State Dept definition of terrorism is – what he did created terror, plain and simple.
If parents now worry about the safety of their children – he accomplished the SAME thing a Paki sucide-bomber does when he blows up a crowded marketplace.
Terrorists are on a mission of hatred – and no where is that more clear than what happened yesterday at Virginia Tech.
I can’t believe you’re actually defending this monster.
Shame on you.
Not defending him….please. Just pointing out that you are an idiot just as I suspected. Your right wing tirades are ridiculous. Anything to try to breed fear into the public and keep everyone scared is the goal. There is inherent risk involved everyday you walk out the door. I assume it and so do you. Believe it or not there are mentally ill people among us. I am serious. Not everyone is perfect like you. Sadly, this clown acted out and took 32 lives. For anybody to try to make this more than a sad tragedy is crazy themselves. This could happen anywhere at anytime. I pray for the families in their time of loss. And by no means and I must repeat for those of you that cannot comprehend things the first time you read them….defending this guy! But you are reaching and you know it. You live in the fear monging world. I am going to live in reality. Thank you very much. Idiot!
This guy was a nut therefore, he fits no class or group (except nuts, of course). You can’t draw any logical conclusion one way or the other; the guy wasn’t sane so logic doesn’t apply. Whether he was Liberal or conservative has no bearing.
Now whether a nut should be able to purchase a gun….
He was a KNOWN nut, but what do you do about it? Lock him up in the nut house? We don’t have many of those and the prisons are already overcrowded with non-violent drug offenders.
I know people who are nutty. At what point do we decide what’s too nutty?Still, I read that the guy was involved in a couple of stalking incidents. Should that have set off an alarm? I haven’t seen the details about the stalking, but even if he was apprehended for that, he’d probably walk.
GSheridan, where did you get that Mike was defending the VT shooter? Shame on you for putting words in someone else’s mouth. Mike was pointing out that the shooter is not a terrorist by the commonly accepted definitions.
The difference between a terrorist act and a ‘regular’ violent act is intent of the perpetrator. Both have the affect of scaring (or terrorizing as a synonym) people. However, only the act committed with intent to create intimidation is a terrorist act. That does not diminish from the severity or heinousness of either crime (or either criminal), as in this case, the senseless murder of so many students is definitely awful.
GSheridan,
FYI: NO ONE is defending the disgusting criminal who killed all those innocent people yesterday.
Several people have rightly taken issue with your overly broad use of the term terrorist. In case you hadn’t noticed, our President has declared a “War on Terrorism.” If we’re going to fight wars against terrorists, it’s useful to make a distinction between terrorists and criminals.
Is domestic violence terrorism?
And one other observation about your last comment. You use the term “Paki sucide-bomber.” You are aware that Pakistan is one of our allies, are you not? An esteemed member of the “Coalition of the Willing.” Along with Tonga. We must never forget Tonga. Oh, and Iceland.
Brian and Condor….I appreciate you having my back on this one. I really do
“Mike, I don’t care what the State Dept definition of terrorism is – what he did created terror, plain and simple.”
Was McVeigh a terrorist? Whitman? If not a terrorist, certainly someone who causes terror. “Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as terrorism. A 1988 study by the US Army[1] counted 109 definitions of terrorism that covered a total of 22 different definitional elements.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism
Why are we arguing about whether the guy is a terrorist or not? From what I read, folks at VT are pretty nervous right now.
What can I say…..f***ing idiots that get caught up in the fringe. Never make it to the center of the issue. I know alot of battered women that are nervous when their man comes home. Are they terrorists? If so then put their a**es in Cuba. Matter of fact lets put anybody that has ever frightened another person in Cuba. No lawyers no courts…..torture them all!
I remember one time….when I didn’t pay my phone bill, the company terrorized me with harassing notices in the mail. I was so nervous. Should have put those terrorists in jail. I was really scared!
Its a battle about guns that states have to engage in. The Federal fight has Senators corrupted.
Create database of gun transactions at gun shows, at gun stores. Be them law abiding or fake people buying weapons.
Remind everyone who sells guns, its unlawful to do it without telling some state authority.
It’s good civic practice to get authorities the name of people you sold a gun to.
It’s like a car being transferred for sale between people. They sign a document, the gun is no longer your responsibility.
The database is to catch repeat fake people buying weapons. That’s the state interest to protect society.
The ability to get a gun by law abiding citizens isn’t harmed.
This guy I caught on TV yesterday and looked him up. Same answers for VT tragedy, he said years ago.
http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/zforum/99/velleco042299.htm
Mrage, do you even have a point? You’re trying to pin this on firearm companies who are supposedly dumping weapons on the street for insurance money. Which is fairly mis-informed. Once a company gets to a certain size, they self insure. You need to look at your source with a little more skepticism. Your just repeating urban legends.
You want new laws to prevent this. In case you hadn’t noticed, murder is against the law, it has pretty severe consequences. Yet that didn’t stop him.
Accept the fact this wack job was going to do this sooner or later. Whether it was a legally purchased gun or a stolen car, people were going to be hurt.
Trying to inject some anti-gun mantra into the situation is just a feeble attempt at politicizing a tragic event. It has no place in this.
“I know alot of battered women…”
mike– You know a lot of battered women? Something smells with you statement and I doubt if it’s true.
To those saying gun companies are dumping cases of guns on the streets, would you tell me where the next drop will be? I think it is time to lock and load.
I saw last night where NYC had sent undercover cops to Virginia to buy guns, about 15 minutes and a couple I.D’s they could get what they wanted. NYC blames most of it’s guns on the streets to being purchased in Virgina.
So Virginia is to blame for the shootings?
Well, NBC announced that they received a package from Cho in the mail today – in it, among other things was a Manifesto.
How much more political can you get than that?
They are expected to air some of it – but reports are it’s pretty bad.
Who was it, by the way, that stated yesterday this terrorist was simply a guy despondent because his girlfriend slept with another guy?
Who was that again?
Political? Or ‘moral’? He specifically refered to debauchery in the note he left. Drcrying our moral behavior?
“I know alot of battered women that are nervous when their man comes home.”—————
How would you know this? Is it first hand knowledge?
Is it YOUR home, too?
Ben- this isn’t about the note.
NBC received a package just today, sent by Cho right before he started the killing spree, with photos and a very long and detailed Manifesto.
This guy was planning this – and prepared to slaughter. He had an agenda.
GSheridan, I thought Mike went to your place to administer the ‘punishments’
Tusk,
Your not going to apologize for the gun industry. They require nothing reasonable to own a weapon.
Are police reports public record, do I have research cases of weapons found, nationwide?
Jails aren’t full of people involved with illegal guns. Retail guns with serial numbers filed down.
You won’t believe corruption with manufacturers is real.
You can say a motivated killer will find some way.
The fight has been lost with the gun lobby on the Federal level. States can try to control some aspects of gun sales at stores and gun shows.
States shouldn’t act like Virginia that allows such ease to buy ANY WEAPON. Cho with more money could have really armed himself with bigger more deadly guns.
No questions asked.
To me, we’re in a horrible position as a society with guns.
I’m not anti-gun for hunting or home protection. I’m more anti-gun for some cc wanna be’s.
I’m definitely anti-gun when criminals are carrying around brand new weapons.
Police have shown those guns on TV, brand new like they were fresh out of crate.
That’s why the City Council thought it reasonable to try and sell some the guns, police captured. Their new!
I’m mad we didn’t get to vote on the choice either.
Agenda does not equal terrorism.Agenda also means that most gun laws (and any potential ones that would be upheld in the SCOTUS) would not have stopped him.
There are just some crazy people in this world that will do crazy shet.
‘Cho with more money could have really armed himself with bigger more deadly guns’
And which, pray tell, would those be?
GS – I am not disagreeing on that. My point is that there is no evidence that it is “political” in the usual meaning of the term. Based on other things that have come out it looks like his twisted version of “moral”.
I realize that it is a fine line but i think the two things are different. Mainly I don’t think we should be jumping to such conclusions; particularly in light of the things that came out today that he was raised in a devout Christian home. That does not support the attempts yesterday (AtlasShrugged and Sean Hannity) to lay this on Muslims.
Let’s not try to lay this an any sort of politics unless there is some evidence. And a “manifesto” is hardly that.
“There are just some crazy people in this world that will do crazy shet.”
This guy hated the rich people and it made him crazy.Sounds a little like You People?
brian – I must have missed that. God only knows what Mike’s thinking, anyway. Or if he actually thinks. He won’t answer any questions I pose – like what solutions he may have.
He just attacks other folks.
….sigh….
NBC material …
http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynamic/stories/V/VIRGINIA_TECH_SHOOTING?SITE=NYNYP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-04-18-17-02-43
Mailed between the sets of killings.
This should ahve kept him from buying a gun:
“Earlier in the day Wednesday, authorities disclosed that more than a year before the massacre, Cho was accused of stalking two women and was taken to a psychiatric hospital on a magistrate’s orders because of fears he might be suicidal. He was later released with orders to undergo outpatient treatment.
The disclosure added to the rapidly growing list of warning signs that appeared well before the student opened fire. Among other things, Cho’s twisted, violence-filled writings and sullen, vacant-eyed demeanor had disturbed professors and students so much that he was removed from one English class and was repeatedly urged to get counseling.”
“This guy hated the rich people and it made him crazy. Sounds a little like You People?”
Who, exactly, are the You People?
But, mike knows a LOT of battered women. Maybe he meant battered shrimp, or something.
Fleetwood, you bring up an interesting point.
Was Cho’s hatred of the rich the cause of his mental illness, or merely a result?
There have long been those who follow the fantasy of the Robin Hood syndrome, justifying theft from those with more, in order to give to those with less. In reality, of course, they are nothing more than common criminals theives, to be sure.
We may not know what Cho wrote in his Manifesto for a long time, however I bet NBC would like to strike while the fire’s hot – and release some soon.
Until then, we really can’t know what went through his warped mind.
But we can be sure his mind was warped. Badly.
“Maybe he meant battered shrimp, or something.”
——————
Oh yeah – must be.
Maybe he works at Long John Silver’s.
I’ll bet that’s it.
brian,
I have no idea other choices at that gun store in Virginia, Desert Eagle, a .45. Something with a laser sight.
Bigger handguns than what he had. Those guns he bought were enough for the carnage he created.
But some want bigger, louder weapons than a 9mm or a .22
“Who, exactly, are the You People?”
That would be the proud members of the Commie Libs.
I saw a reference to him saying something about being abused. This also seems to be consistent with one of his earlier writings.
He hated commie libs? Makes sense I guess since he was from SOUTH Korea and railed against debauchery.
“He hated commie libs?”
No. He hated people who made something of their lives.Commie Libs just hate that.
The tasteless jokes and political jabs here by Fleetwood and Sheridan just add to the already the already overwhelming body of evidence that they have no class, no decency and no shame.
I leave Republican out of that assessment only because it appears he’s not here right now. If he were I’m sure he wouldn’t hesitate to jump right into the cesspool.
I actually don’t have much of a problem with background checks for party-to-party gun sales… I’ve sold a few before, and it’d be nicer in my view to actually know the legal status of a purchaser BEFORE you hand them a weapon. However, this would come with caveats:
#1. It would have to be expedient.#2. Any financial burden must be borne by the state/feds, NOT the buyer or seller.#3. If a seller is cleared to sell a firearm to a buyer, he or she shall be held indemnible for any and all actions on the part of the buyer, including errors of omission by the regulating body, unless it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the seller KNEW the buyer intended to purchase the weapon for the specific intent to break the law.
I always thought there should be a way to check on person-to-person sales, voluntarily. But it shouldn’t be pay-for-service, and it needs to be as fast as the NICS check when you go to a gun dealer. Anyone who can’t wait 10 minutes to buy a gun has a problem, but 7 days is probably a bit long.
Postal,
Just like its better to transfer car titles at the DMV with someone, there should be somewhere where “OFFICIAL” people can transfer sale of weapons.
Police sponsored gun store where they get gear. Database right there, the person receiving a gun has a driver license and not wanted. Data from state records.
Police could promote the location for gun transfers.
At gun shows some process has to register the transfer of guns, the state could put in a database.
Why would a law abiding person keep selling so many guns, if something isn’t funny going on.
To sell bulk amount of weapons don’t you need a federal license?
Its not good some person is transferring a lot of weapons with no records or license.
The buyers are unknown too. Society is harmed when people buy guns and sell them fast to strangers.
There should be no restrictions on gun sales at all. If I, or any citizen, walk into a gun shop or a gun show and show my ID and go through an instant background check then I should be able to pluck my cash down and walk out the door with a weapon of my choosing.
Kev,
Its your actions the next time you buy a gun. Answer a few questions.
Do you still own it. If not, who did you sell it to? Was it a gift to someone?
Have you joined a shooting club?
Do you have a hunting license?
Take a vision test. Isn’t it reasonable gun stores should check vision?
If you fail to answer the questions, next time Kev, you shouldn’t get another one. If you fail the vision test too.
States could require the paperwork information.
The dealers use an instacheck computer system, which is a system based on public record files on criminal background histories, the emphasis has been on criminal background history.When you purchase a gun from a license dealer, you have to fill out a form that is submitted to the BATF.On that form it will ask you if you have any mental illness, drug or alcohol addictions, you are to answer YES or NO.Faults of the background check system is that there are no public records check systems on the mental status of the purchaser of the weapon. Acquirements of information on what the illness of a person has should be confidential and private but information on if a person has an event of mental illness should be of (Authorized personnel) public record and that should be emphasized just as well as criminal in background checks.Officers of the court of law, when applying for licenses or occupations of security, private investigations and law enforcement institutions has to go thru a background check of criminal, mental and characteristics.Question: Why is it that the average citizen in making a purchase of a weapon is not being subjected to the same system of checks as those in the law enforcement industries?
Thanks for the clarification fleettwood. That would make me doubly a target of that Virginia-raised guy’s rage.
“The tasteless jokes and political jabs here by Fleetwood and Sheridan just add to the already the already overwhelming body of evidence that they have no class, no decency and no shame.”———
Oh, gee. More hateful diatribe from Condor.
Is anyone surprised?
…rolleyes…
Now, let’s see – where were we?
Oh yes, Kev – I agree absolutely. There is no reason whatsoever to punish honest law-abiding citizens because we have a few nut cases around.
Mrage – you ask why anyone would keep selling guns unless something ‘funny’ was going on. I’m not sure what you mean by funny, but there are a whole lot of collectors of firearms at those shows. I’ve never bought or sold anything at one of them – but I’ve been to them. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting some of the most enlightening and intelligent individuals there, and I never fail to leave without learning something.
Visit one sometime. You won’t find a bunch of gangs or thugs. You’ll find decent folks that know a lot about the history of firearms and they enjoy each other’s company.
Hence the name “show.”
WHY, was this guy NOT deported the first minute that the judge in Virginia declared him a danger and put him in the loony bin?
This should be a conversation about mental illness.
I got this from another blog:
What is known is that a Virginia judge had certified him as being mentally ill and a danger to himself and others.
And the judge had him committed to a Virginia facility for the mentally ill.
And the Virginia police knew this.
And he had been identified by the police as a stalker of women.
And the Virginia psyciatric doctors knew this.
And several of his professors at the university had reported his mental condition and asked that he be counselled and asked that he leave their class.
And his classmates knew this to a degree.
And less than six months ago the guy went to a nearby gun peddlerand filled out the form and showed his driver’s license and something else and plopped down his $500 bucksand was the proud owner of a Glock handgun.
And he did the same thing down the road for a semiautomatic handgun.
And he went somewhere and bought a few hundred rounds of ammo for his growing arsenal.
And he shot about 50 people multiple times.
-4Equality.
Saw the video from this kid. He regularly talked of God, and him being like Jesus.
Hmm.
Go ahead Condor, sling your best mud.
You really don’t need an excuse do you?
PM – you saw the video? Could you link us to it?
They said they hadn’t released most of it yet. And they said he was totally anti-Christian. Perhaps the link Vaughn Tolle posted yesterday was correct after all – maybe he was a Muslim.
This is what he said at one point:——————–”"You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today,” 23-year-old Cho Seung-Hui said in an harsh, emphatic voice, in an excerpt shown on “NBC Nightly News.” “But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off.”NBC said the package, received in Wednesday morning’s mail, contained an 1,800-word diatribe and 29 photos, 11 of them showing him aiming handguns at the camera. Much of his rant is incoherent and laced with profanity, and he rails against hedonism and Christianity, NBC said.Some of the pictures showed him smiling. Some showed him brandishing two weapons at a time, one in each hand. Another showed him swinging a hammer two-fisted.”
————————-
And I guess a guy in the newsroom noticed the package had the same Muslim-type wording on it – as it is claimed was written on Cho’s arm.
Unreal.
Since Republican apparently hasn’t bothered to read anything upthread, I’ll briefly summarize for him. Upthread GSheridan deliberately blurs the distinction between criminality and terrorism. Given that we’re, you know, fighting a WAR against terrorism, some people here take the trouble to point out that there’s an important distinction to be made between the terms.
In turn, GSheridan promptly accuses Mike of defending the heinous, senseless murder of dozens of innocent people. This tactic is revolting but sadly unsurprising considering the source.
GSheridan and Fleetwood then tag team to make a number of juvenile, insipid jokes about domestic violence, accuse Mike of being guilty of domestic violence and then Fleetwood completes this sad series of posts with several assertions that the deranged murderer of dozens of innocent people is representative of and/or motivated by liberal ideology.
I dare to suggest that all of this is evidence that GSheridan and Fleetwood have no class, no decency and no shame.
GSheridan then accuses ME of posting hateful diatribes.
Predictably, Republican then scampers up after the fact to eagerly and approvingly sniff at the shit his pals have spread around.
So that’s the short version of my excuse, Republican. What’s yours?
I’ll be sorely disapointed if you don’t accuse me of sympathizing with, defending or enabling mass murder and/or domestic abuse.
More childish hateful diatribe from Condor.
Keep it up – you’re running so true to form.
You might want to seek help Condor, you write like that VT gunman – everything is a conspiracy. Everyone else is a fault but yourself. I’m seeing a similarity here. :)
There are some truly sick folks on this board – GSheridan, Fleettwood and Republican – you people need some help. This Va Tech incident was not about politics or religion.
Grow up.
Wow. A back to back two-fer of ignorant shamelessness. If only Fleetwood were here. They could have gone for the hat trick.
I call trifecta, commie bastards!
Bob, get a clue, I was messing with him. He made the challenge, I responded.
The sad thing is that the two of you thought it was serious.
Repub–They are disturbed that the crazy Cho hated rich people. They know it makes the you people look poorly.Just when they had it going on, what with all the legislation they have passed in the last 100 days and all.
So Republican, you and Fleettwood and GSheridan were just joking? So this is a comedy board? Thanks for letting us know. Somehow, I thought Sheridan, Fleettwood and you were actually serious. So how are we to know when you are ‘joking’ and when you are ’serious’?
bob-When I say you people are commie seditionists, I’m serious.When you post, it’s a joke.
Any questions?
:D
I will remember to scroll over your posts in the future, Fleettwood, obviously you think that anyone that disagrees with you is a Communist, therefore making you a fool of epic measures.
Thank you however for letting me know that I should ignore you. You are an asshole obviously.
Gee,
I’ve been to gun shows in the past, not the last 10 years though. I know gun collectors.
Gun shows and stores should have some minimal paperwork that will allow transfer of guns stays legal.
—–
What’s that?
Muslim writing on Cho’s arm? Ismail AX?
It’s wording related to Axle Rose. The singer of GunsandRoses was the best explanation I’ve found.
Cho’s bizarre writings chilled VT professors and students but they could be words related to Axle Rose abused life biography.
Pop culture words corrupted.
Cho’s madness made the words more evil sounding but I doubt if he was insane.
VT allowed him back in his room with more roommates, they didn’t think he was a danger.
He wasn’t a danger until the ease of purchasing guns with no questions asked.
He missed a lot of classes recently, some said, out practicing how to shoot.
Getting the right look of his gun man outfit and taking pictures of himself.—–
Mrage the ease with which he bought guns is disturbing but to equate that with the need to fix our gun law is like comparing apples and oranges.
Someone this determined will find a way. He was a very intelligent young man and very troubled. A deadly combination. By trying to fix blame on gun laws we are overlooking all of the things that might have been done to stop this from happening.
Many signs were just swept under the rug, information was never shared because of the new HIPAA laws. These law were poorly constructed and are a horror to enforce. To keep from getting sued doctors offices and clinics have just refused to release any information.
These laws more than gun laws or the lack of them might have contributed to this debacle.
University officials should have been warned when he was declared mentally defective by the state of Virginia. They weren’t. Thank HIPAA.
“You are an asshole obviously.”
I love you, bobup and kiss my ass.
Did you have anything to say that would continue the debate or are you just confirming that you are an idiot, Fleettwood? From what I can tell, you nothing to say that means anything to anyone.
Universal background check, DNA provision and a legitimate waiting period. I have no problems with gun ownership, but I do have a problem with the ease of ownership.
Need a gun? Shouldn’t be a problem waiting a week to ten days. Get caught with a gun with no serial number? Get put on a no gun list. Get caught hunting out of season, car-hunting or a myriad assortment of other stupid gun tricks, get put on a no gun list. Get caught with a gun when on the no gun list? Minimum 1 year in jail. Get caught using a gun in the commission of a crime? 10 years plus the crime.
Make it really bad for stupid gun users. Remember: it wasn’t the gun that killed those students, it was a demented soul. I pray for him and his victims.
Bob,Ignore fleetwood and his non-issue posts. His only purpose is as an agent provocateur. Empty heads spit empty thoughts.
OK one question at a time:
Kev,
Its your actions the next time you buy a gun. Answer a few questions.
Do you still own it. If not, who did you sell it to? Was it a gift to someone?
I do not still own the gun I used to have.
Have you joined a shooting club?
No, I have not
Do you have a hunting license?
No. I have not shot any animals. I guess this fact disqualifies me for President of the USA huh?
Take a vision test. Isn’t it reasonable gun stores should check vision?
Did you see the Blues Brothers movie? Looked to me like Ray Charles was a pretty good shot!
HIPAA is not the problem, the ones who don’t understand HIPAA are the problem. HIPAA distinctly allows for information to be shared in incidences like this.
Kev,
Those kind of questions are easily answerable if states took some control of sales and trades at stores or gun shows.
Your an honest guy, if you don’t have the gun, explain who you sold the gun to.
That’s the determination on purchasing another gun. The transfer of the former one.
Having the hunting license means you can select a shotgun or rifle.
They should suggest some shooting ranges you could join.
Pass a vision test, that has to happen.
It’s not right guns are sold to people with bad vision.
Not much information to collect with gun purchases so I don’t think states would have a hard time making that happen.
Ray Charles is greatly missed. I’ve seen Blues Bros often, on the list of my favorite movies. That was a funny moment.
As the first posted noted – why is this an issue? This shooter did not buy from this “loophole.” Neither were “assault weapons” – a politically loaded but meaningless term – used. But that won’t stop the gun grabbers from leveraging this tragedy for their purposes.
First. The “gun show loophole” us a myth. There is no such thing. A dealer must go through the NICS process to sell a gun (as outlined by a couple of posters above); that is no different at a gun show.
Having been to a number of shows, and bought there occasionally, the rules are no different there. There will be one Saturday and Sunday at the Colliseum; go out there and find examples of this alleged “loophole.” You won’t find it.
What you really want to regulate are private sales, between individuals. 1) How do you enforce that? 2) such a sale record is really registration. More about that in a moment.
It is impossible to regulate sales between individuals. Individuals buy and sell items, of all kinds, all the time. A gun is small, easily hidden and thus impossible to regulate (unlike a car, for example), it can and will be bought, sold, and traded routinely. It is impossible to stop such sales, even if one wanted to. And as the first poster pointed out, the guns used in this shooting were purchased according to a law more restrictive than Kansas law.
Regulated sales between individuals, in addition, is de facto registration. No, No, NO!!!
The currents NICS check is valid. No one wants guns sold to felons. It is acceptable because there are no records kept, by the gov’t, of those sales (supposedly – if you believe what BATF says, and assume they follow the law. I don’t.). Futher, a gun can be legally bought – at least in Kansas – from individuals. There are some states where that is not the case.
But to require same of all sales? No. As a practical matter, how do you make the NICS system available for private sales? And despite what those who seek “reasonable” regulation SAY, their goal is confiscation. Make no mistake about that. Registration is merely a step toward that goal of confiscation. Let the SCOTUS make a clear, explicit, and firm declaration that a the right to “keep and bear arms” is a firmly established and inalienable right, much as we recognize first amendment rights, and THEN we’ll talk about registration. Not until.
Thanks to Tiahrt not all gun dealers are required to be licensed.
A big question is why a gun was sold to someone that had been declared by a psychiatric to be mentally unstable and a danger to himself and society. Selling guns to people with mental disorders isn’t that brilliant of an idea. However, thanks to Tiahrt, such information about this guy owning a gun can’t be shared with other police departments.
Banning guns will never work; there are just too many out there. Besides, guns don’t kill people; bullets kill people, so how about these for possible solutions:1.All reloading supplies are banned, all expended shell casings must be returned to the manufacturer before more ammunition can be purchased.2.The purchase of ammunition would require a no-refills prescription for no more than 30 rounds, signed by a practicing trauma surgeon.3. A tax of $100 per round, placed in a fund to compensate victims of violent crime, so that gun owners would think at least twice before pulling that trigger.4. Possession of any ammunition without prescription or proof of tax payment would be a felony, as would possession of gunpowder, casings, primers or reloading equipment.While the Constitution allows the keeping and bearing of firearms, I don’t recall it saying anything about ammunition, and after all, that’s what kills!
It’s been a while since I’ve checked the numbers, but a few years ago there were at least 10 federally-licensed gun dealers in America for every McDonald’s outlet.
Think about that for a minute next time you’re driving around town. Between the time you drive past one McDonald’s and approach another, ten individuals are in the business of selling guns.
Arguably, Americans are insane in their support for so many McDonald’s restaurants. That there are ten times as many *legal* gun dealers is staggering.
When I was in college I worked a Christmas season in a store that sold guns. The manager’s instructions included how to help customers fill out the required forms. “Tell them to answer ‘no’ to all the questions,” he said, about the “Are you addicted to drugs? Have you been treated for mental illness? Have you been convicted of a felony?” etc.
In another thread I presented my proposal for preserving 2nd Amendment rights while taking active steps toward assuring that the right to bear arms is balanced by responsibility, accountability, and competence.
Gun nuts have express their personal hatred for me. Gun-grabbers have reacted similarly. Sounds like a pretty good compromise to me; nobody is totally satisfied, but both groups’ concerns are addressed.
In discussing this issue over the years my instinct has come close to believing that anyone in America should be allowed to own guns…except for those who really *really* want them.
If you’d read my e-mail, you’d understand.
GMC,
When will confiscation happen? Because the system will have your address?
My questions didn’t ask for that kind of information.
Strictly a name..whom did you sell or trade the gun to.
If the name is made up, that’s a crime. Why would a law abiding person want to commit a crime buying a gun?
At a gun store or gun show, some questions have to be answered.
Personal sales or transfers can be regulated, if a location is provided by police and supporters of the process. A place where the state database exists. Police or state officials will be there to make sure people buying a gun aren’t wanted.
No one wants to sell a gun to criminals. They should have a valid drivers license or id’s. Criminals won’t.
Make transfers of guns, no matter their size, just like a car. A place like the DMV.
A legal gun sale requires some procedures. A gun is not a blender or microwave. Those kind of things can be sold and traded without registration.
A gun causes death, animals or people, it has to be handled with responsibility.
The seller has to be responsible, before they could get more guns.
Give the gun to someone, they give it to another, its stolen or lost, then someone else has it…that’s not good for guns. Especially guns that can be traced by to the original owner.
Everyone moving that gun around is being irresponsible.
A database would hold the dates a person bought guns. That’s reasonable information for states to keep a record.
Buyers have to show some responsibility, they handled guns properly, allows them to buy more.
It’s not acceptable to keep guns moving around into a variety of hands. There’s no record of sale or transfer.
That’s a huge problem with guns today in our society. No questions asked. No records kept.
It doesn’t harm the ability to buy guns long as people are acting responsible.
Please agree with me, gun sales should have a vision test. That’s why has to be somewhere a vision test can be taken, to transfer a gun between individuals, responsibly.
Pmom one of the psychologists said it was privacy issues that prevented the state from sharing with the university the state of his mental health. HIPAA is so poorly written many health care providers draw a much stricter line than necessary in order to protect themselves from lawsuits.
I went to school for two years on HIPAA before it became law and there are still things I don’t understand how you could enforce them. Someone this troubled should never have been released to the general population without warning those that he was around daily.
Pmom one of the psychologists said it was privacy issues that prevented the state from sharing with the university the state of his mental health. HIPAA is so poorly written many health care providers draw a much stricter line than necessary in order to protect themselves from lawsuits.
I went to school for two years on HIPAA before it became law and there are still things I don’t understand how you could enforce them. Someone this troubled should never have been released to the general population without warning those that he was around daily.
If I heard correctly tonight, Cho had been declared a “danger to himself or others” due to mental illness some two years before. If so . . .
why, oh why was that adjudication not recorded and entered into teh NICS system?
Anyone have any idea?
And Mrage: short answer – never. You may want not confiscation (so you say) but the Brady Bunch, the Shumers and Feinsteins of the world seek exactly that. They won’t say so, of course, but they are so dishonest in their rhetoric now, why should I believe them?
“There are some truly sick folks on this board…”
bob-Your 8:02 post started it. I didn’t. If you can’t take it, go make be breakfast, then wash my car.
Hey bob, will you come over and help me weed my Rose Garden after you’re done washing Fleet’s car?
Bring leather gloves. Those thorns are a bear.
GMC70 –
“… the Brady Bunch, the Shumers and Feinsteins of the world seek [to confiscate handguns.] They won’t say so, of course, but they are so dishonest in their rhetoric now…”
If you want dishonesty, look at how the NRA masquerades as a “constitution rights” group, hiding their real mission: as a marketing arm of gun manufacturers. Their only agenda is to sell more guns.
Doug,
Hate to call you on this one, but all gun dealers MUST be registered under federal law. There are types of FFLs (Federal Firearms Licenses) that are designed for individuals for collection purposes (Curio & Relic, or CRFFL, pronounced “cruffle”) and there was a rash of individuals licensed by the BATFE to be “dealers” who were not, vis a vis the laws regarding dealership of weapons, legitimate dealers. The distinction is that CRFFL licenses require you to NOT be in the business of selling guns (you can’t open a store) while Class 1 FFLs require you to prove that the sale of firearms is a source of livelihood (for-profit.) Any person doing retail business in firearms without a Class 1 FFL is in violation of federal law. No exceptions.
Save one. A person, who is the registered owner, or legitimate owner, of a firearm, has the right to sell that firearm to another private party without a license. I’ve gotten rid of three firearms by this method, usually a trade instead of an out-and-out purchase. This is not an exemption for retail, this is a protection of the rights of individuals. If I go put up a storefront and start selling my “personal” guns behind a cash register, the BATFE is going to have a field day fining me and/or putting me in jail for weapons charges. If I trade a weapon or sell a weapon to another person, then I have that right. Insomuch as a person has the right to acquire property, they have the right to divest themselves of the same. They could sell it to a dealer who would then check it against the NCIC database, but if you wanted to sell your car, would you take it to a dealer, or sell it to a private party? Dealers will only give you wholesale, private parties will give you retail. It’s purely economic.
I think everyone’s getting the idea that every person who sells a weapon to a private party is some kind of straw buyer, who goes to buy a weapon for someone who can’t. Well, lo and behold, when I go and fill out the BATFE paperwork for that weapon, it’s now registered to ME, so if I go sell it to some felon and he goes and murders someone, it’s pretty obvious that I bought the gun for him. Gun shows do have a certain number of people who are selling private collection guns, but most of the ones I go to, the sellers are mostly FFL holders. There are far easier ways to buy guns illegally than go to a gun show.
Plus, all of this is irrelevant, since dude in question passed an NCIC check and purchased a firearm legally from a FFL dealer across the counter. Waiting period? He obviously could have waited 30 days, because that’s how long he had the thing. I’m surprised that in this redneck hick state that there are so many people who have such gun terror.
GMC, I’ll take a stab at responding to the question posed in your 1:31 am post.
It appears from the records that the determination made by the judge in Virginia so widely reported is similar to that required under the Kansas Care and Treatment statutes so a person may be involuntarily confined for a psychiatric evaluation and treatment. Note that the order is labeled a “Temporary Detention Order” (from the PDF I looked at yesterday). At the end of this period, usually three days, there is another evaluation made by a doctor. Unless there is evidence that the individual is still “an imminent danger to himself or others”, the individual is discharged. This is not, in any way, a final adjudication of mental illness or incompetence; rather, it is a temporary finding, required to involuntarily confine for evaluation/treatment.
It is my understanding that most all persons who are subject to these procedures are, in fact, not finally adjudicated as mentally ill. Rather, the short-term evaluation and treatment are sufficient to resolve the immediate crisis, and when the second “hearing” is held, the person no longer meets the statutorily required criteria for further proceedings/commitment.
I don’t know an analogy that would be useful; perhaps one concerning those arrested for a misdemeanor, e.g., and then after a short period, released and the charges dismissed for lack of evidence. As I say, I’m not comfortable with that analogy, but it comes close to describing the process involved. The point I’m trying to make is that there was, in fact, a temporary finding, which did not lead to further proceedings to determine the need for commitment as an “insane person”.
I’ll post the link to the PDF when I find it again, so that you can look at the preprinted form/checkbox approach to the problem.
No, the mission of the NRA is to call me once a month asking for money, send me DVDs and commemorative coins I didn’t order, and go hyperbolic every time the word “gun” is uttered inside either house of Congress. That said, they are THE lobby standing between us and being the UK or Australia, where you have no right to defend yourself against armed criminals.
“Their [NRA] only agenda is to sell more guns.”
Any evidence of same, Long Time? I didn’t think so. Last time I checked, the 2nd Amendment was still in place, even if so many gun grabbers can’t understand a basic sentence written in plain English. Were it not for the NRA, love ‘em or not, there is a distinct possibility that said constitutional provision would today be a meaningless dead letter. That says it all.
BTW – The gun grabbers don’t even know what they’re banning. One would think that one ought to actually understand a subject before legislating on it, but apparantly not . . .
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/18/video-carolyn-mccarthy-doesnt-understand-her-own-gun-control-legislation/
Too funny.
I seem to be incapable of copying a link to the order. Where I found it: http://www.abcnews.go.com, and as the various headlines change, the link to the order is under the second picture, title to which starts out “EXCLUSIVE”. It is six pages long, so prohibits copying and pasting.
GMC, I had another thought on your query; as I’m not familiar with NICS, perhaps it isn’t relevant.
Cases dealing with mental illness are civil, rather than criminal, in nature. As such, an adjudication of mental incompetence would be similar to that of negligence.
VT:
Here’s my thought. We have a NICS, which despite my de facto registration concerns, is a valid and reasonable way to bar firearms purchase from those who should not buy – felons, etc (Of course, it is not a cure-all – there is no such thing).
But why would such a judicial determination not be transmitted to be included in a NICS check? That seems obvious. In Kansas, A CC application includes a waiver of medical information so that mental health records may be checked. Such a waiver could be included in a NICS form, and orders such as the judge’s here could be included in that database.
Would it have made difference Monday? We don’t know, of course. There are plenty of places to get guns if one wants to, so perhaps all such a system does is drive some people underground. I know people (legal and sane) who buy all their firearms from private individuals specifically to AVOID the NICS and the de facto registration which it entails.
Maybe this approach? Require a license be issued to the PERSON before he even considers a gun purchase. That license would then allow him to purchase (or not to purchase) when he sees fit.
The license would require both a background check and some level of competance. One worry I have is people not knowing what they are doing having guns in their hands.
Understand, GMC. An intersting thing I noticed in the PDF of the records of the case was a doctor’s finding that Cho, although suffering from a mental illness, did not represent an immediate threat to self or others (roughly accurate quote) which was made the same day as the Court’s order.
As to inclusion of such “temporary” orders in NICS; there are, in the legends of the courts, cases when a family member has begun a “Care and Treatment” proceeding for spite; the temporary detention order is issued, based upon a finding such as that in issue herein; but at the first hearing, it is determined that while old Uncle Bob may be suffering from the ravages of age, arthrosclerosis, he isn’t suffering from a mental illness and is not a danger. Now, the original temporary order contains the “magic words”, but the final order does not. Should the first order be entered into NICS?
Before anyone asks for specifics, as I said, there are “legends” concerning such cases; I’ve not encountered one myself in my practice.
Ben -
Several states do exactly that. Again, my problem with same is that it creates a de facto gun registration within that state. For reasons noted above, I oppose that deeply.
Why should I need the State’s permission to purchase a legal (and constitutionally protected) product? Despite my misgivings, I accept the NICS background check for it’s purpose. Let’s not add another layer of record-keeping and opportunity for official mischief.
Ultimately, of course, none of this would stop a determined madman like Cho.
GMC – Thing is, my system would not know whether or not you actually purchased a gun; only that you are licensed to do so. Sort of like my drivers license – I may or may not choose to buy a car.
Agreed, this might not have stopped this nutcase. That is why there is at least a part of me that might want CC. I’ll have to ponder that.
Ben -
Why would I get a license to do so without doing so? It’s still de facto registration; inherent PC that X has a weapon because X obtained a license for one.
If anyone dropped the ball, it was the Magistrate that did not committ him and send that information to the feds. He was so determine to do this though, Cho would have devised some other scheme to murder as many people as he could. He was a danger to himself and others and yes, I am a Psychologist.
Steve,
He wasn’t dangerous or attacked other people.
Some reports said he set a fire. That event could have thrown him out of the dorm, off campus or out of college, with his background from that diagnosis.
It’s 50% his madness and the ease to get guns. Plus the large amount of bullets that caused this tragedy.
Guns are for home protection. Some use it for self protection, want to carry one around.
But society doesn’t need weapons with 15 shells in a clip.
More shells causes the need to keep shooting with less reloading.
Make guns reload so people have a chance to survive being shot.
6 shots with hollow points will put down most people.
Handguns should be de-powered less shots available per clip.
Aggressively police have to get guns from criminals.
It’s not good for society that handguns have so many bullets.
Right to bear arms, the government can force redesign of arms sold. Less bullets in handguns.
When will have a reasonable government that takes on the gun lobby. Tells the gun lobby what to do. The gun lobby is telling Senators what to do today.
Society is at more risk because the gun lobby is getting their way.
The Mental Health system let all of us down. No matter how manner large capsity clips or magazines you own, normal people do not go around killing others!!!
Marge,What reasonable government are you speaking of? Surely no government entity with the U.S. could be classified as reasonable. When any government limits speech, as our’s does; supports and promotes discrimination, as our’s does; permits one class to have privliges while denies those same privliges to another, as our’s does; allow one person to decide if another should die because of who or what they are, as our’s does; then it is the obligation of the people to remove & replace or overthrow that government (not my words but those in the Decleration of Independence). No we don’t have a reasonable government just as we are not a civilized nation.
wrs, I hereby place you under citizen’s arrest for daring to speak your mind in a free society’s blog. :)
Condor
Much of what you say makes a lot of sense — here are where some potential pit falls might be
#1. It would have to be expedient.
Asking a government agency to be expedient is a lesson in futility — buy maybe if after 30 days no adverse information is presented, the sale is permitted by default – but even that doesn’t sound right. Don’t know what a good alternative might be.#2. Any financial burden must be borne by the state/feds, NOT the buyer or seller.Why should all taxpayers bear the cost of the individuals desire / right to have a gun? Like a gas tax — only the people who buy gas, pay the tax at the pump. But then again it does make some sense for everyone to bear the burden of protecting our society — Rights are not necessarily free?
#3. If a seller is cleared to sell a firearm to a buyer, he or she shall be held indemnible for any and all actions on the part of the buyer, including errors of omission by the regulating body, unless it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the seller KNEW the buyer intended to purchase the weapon for the specific intent to break the law.
Sounds like a good idea — but doesn’t it makes it a requirement that private sellers be licensed (cleared). There’s probably a way to accomplish what you say — I’m not sure making a person who is selling one gun, one time should have to jump through governmental bureaucracy to get licensed for a one time sale.
“I always thought there should be a way to check on person-to-person sales, voluntarily. But it shouldn’t be pay-for-service, and it needs to be as fast as the NICS check when you go to a gun dealer. Anyone who can’t wait 10 minutes to buy a gun has a problem, but 7 days is probably a bit long.”
What would be a way to expedite the system yet still have a system with some credibility?