Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by StevieC
Ok but then is it a really easy background test to pass or something? I don't understand why so many end up in the hands of crazy folks that bought them legitimately. Not being sarcastic, trying to understand.
Up here you go through your federal police check once you have completed the safety course and waited your period of time and then you are granted the license to acquire/own but everyday your name is run through the police database to see if any new charges have been laid against you that are criminal in nature and if that happens they come a knocking for your guns and license temporarily until you have your day in court. They don't fool around.
I think, and Astro can correct me if I'm wrong, but part of the issue is healthcare information being somewhat disparate due to the states themselves being more like their own little countries and thus privacy laws and the like create issues with respect to the reporting of things as well as not enabling a readily updated database of health-related information, which, in the case of mental health, is important. I know one of the more recent cases, the guy had been to the doctor multiple times and the state of his mental health was well noted, yet this never was reported beyond his doctor and thus never made it into the background check system to deny his purchase.
That's essentially the issue: HIPAA, which was intends to make insurance more affordable and easier to transfer, imposed federal privacy laws on information. Health information is very tightly controlled, regardless of what state law might allow.
So, people with mental health issues are prevented from owning guns by Federal law. Federal law also prohibits sharing of that mental health information with authorities who run the background checks.
So, in nearly every case, neighbors, co workers, and medical professionals KNEW a person wasn't fit to own a firearm, but no way existed to get that information to the proper authorities. Medical privacy has trumped public safety.
This is further complicated by a couple of issues.
First, and this one is really important, firearm ownership is an enumerated right. Despite all the political rhetoric surrounding this subject, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment to the US Constitution confers an individual right to own a firearm. A careful reading of the Federalist Papers* lays bare the founder's intent.
Next is the presumption of innocence. As part of due process, a person accused is presumed innocent until the prosecution makes their case. So, if you properly report that someone is "BSC" (bat shot crazy, an abbreviation I'll use), they are entitled to due process before their rights can be abrogated. So, even if the neighbors knew a person was BSC, they would have to prove it before a conviction would render a person ineligible.
Next, is the use of accusation as a weapon of personal or political vengeance. If we allowed the accusation of BSC to deny someone a right, then a vengeful wife beater would make the accusation to prevent her from getting the means to defend herself. Crazy ex GF, angry neighbor, coworker seeking a promotion, there are lots of folks we've seen discussed in various BITOG threads who could leverage an accusation to make life difficult for a person. So, we really don't want accusation as a basis for taking away a right.
Finally, is the point that Overkill makes: there are 50 states. States' rights, and authorities, are a huge part of US law and culture. We are not one homogenous group, though foreign pundits and journalists seem to think we are. You may recall some disagreement on the point of states rights vs. federal jurisdiction in our history. Each state has laws governing all sorts of things, but among them are laws on privacy, gun control, the rights of the accused, and so there is not a uniform jurisdiction for any legal issue, much less gun ownership, on which municipalities like Chicago and New York have imposed further restrictions. In all, between Federal, State and Municipal acts, there are over 20,000 gun regulations in the US.
So, in my opinion, a complex situation won't yield to a simple solution. And "sound bite" or "FaceBook meme discussions really can't advance the debate, or improve the situation.
*The Federalist Papers, anonymously published by "Publius" after the Constitutional Convention were arguments in favor of ratification. The Authors included Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay, who became the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act
