Adjudicated Mentally Defective
Via AC, comes this hysterical Nashville Scene piece by Jeff Woods on Tennessee’s reaction to Virginia Tech:
The annual low comedy that is the Tennessee legislature is well under way, and the shenanigans again this year include bills letting supposedly law-abiding citizens carry pistols into saloons, state parks and all sorts of other new places. The Second Amendment is paramount at the Capitol, which behaves like an adjunct of the National Rifle Association. No one mentions the inconvenient truth that any of these thousands of Tennesseans exercising their right to go strapped could have been wearing a straitjacket in a mental institution a few hours earlier.
I love me some hysterical qualifiers like supposedly and could have been instead of actual cases. I mean, Jeff Woods could have been taken for credible. But, as is evident, he supposedly prefers pants-shitting hysterics over, you know, factual statements to advocate. Anyhoo, on to what got his pretty little panties all bunched up:
Yes, even lunatics apparently have the right to buy firearms in Tennessee.
An utter and complete falsehood. Federal law and Tennessee law prohibit the sale of firearms to those adjudicated mentally defective. Once so adjudicated, you lose your right to arms. So, I can presume that you could have been doing some research and know that is false, which makes you a liar. Or you don’t know any better, and are supposedly ignorant.
Almost 10 months after the massacre at Virginia Tech, where the young killer could buy guns even though he had been found mentally unsound, no action has been taken in Tennessee to prevent such a tragedy here.
Quite misleading. Cho unlawfully purchased his weapons. Cho had been adjudicated mentally defective. The issue is that when congress passed the national instant check system (NICS) back in the 1990s, there was no provision requiring states to report such records. And there was no funding provided to the states to cover the costs of that. Because, you know, it’s illegal for the feds to require states to administer their programs. The NICS Improvement Bill recently passed by Congress and endorsed by the NRA provides funding to states that keep their NICS records up to date. And the bill seeks to clarify (though some argue poorly) what is meant by adjudicated mentally defective. And the bill requires participating states to submit quarterly info to the NICS.
As the Scene reported last May, Tennessee can’t be troubled to send the names of even the dangerously mentally ill to the FBI’s national instant background check system.
Yes. Because some people are concerned about this little concept known as privacy. What does the governor say:
The governor is thinking about doing something, but hasn’t yet. “If someone had a reasonable way and was willing to provide the funding to aggregate that data and if the data gave some reasonable protections to the privacy of the individuals…then I would think that would be a reasonable thing to do,” Bredesen told reporters recently. “I don’t know how to do it in the current system.”
Well, Phil, you’re in luck. What ace reporter Jeff Woods didn’t mention to you is that (as mentioned above) the federales have offered to pay for it. And you can thank the NRA, who Mr. Woods appears to hold in such contempt. And the NICS bill allows reporting of, basically, yes or no. No requirement to divulge medical info.
Crazy as it may sound, even mentally ill people who have been involuntarily committed to institutions as a danger to themselves or others can go to a gun store on the day of their release, pass the background check and walk out with a firearm in Tennessee, just like that.
And when they do, they’re breaking the law.
So, let’s review. Mr. Woods is factually deficient. However, I’ve made his point for him in a manner that doesn’t involve bringing up the narrative that crazy people are running into gun stores and arming themselves to the teeth. My method is a better pitch and doesn’t require lying. Or the purchase of new underwear.
Try that, instead of scaring people. It’s not hard.
Also there is, of course, the issue that in Tennessee, gun sales are verified by our own instant check system called the TICS. The TICS runs potential buyers through the NICS system, as well as other systems maintained by the TBI and others. Seems if I were someone commenting on Tennessee’s stupid gun laws, I’d make at least a slight effort to know what those gun laws are and I’d know who administered background checks, particularly when addressing those background checks.
Update: Ok, one more thing:
What happened at Virginia Tech caused Congress to pass a law that was supposed to strengthen buyer background checks, but didn’t.
Yes, it did. Even voluntary compliance can improve a system
The law, signed by President Bush in January, doesn’t require states to report to the system, but merely offers as-yet-unspecified financial incentives for those that choose to do so.
Yeah, because such a requirement is illegal. Remember?
And before Congress could vote, the NRA hijacked the bill and added requirements that those states give back gun rights to one-time lunatics who can prove they aren’t crazy anymore—a procedure that could easily cost more than any federal funding that might eventually arrive.
OMG! You mean people can petition the government for a redress of grievances? Or address that they may have lost a right without due process of law? Why, that’s just awful.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Reading this popped a thought in my head.
I’d bet – I’d bet my life – that there are thousands of people in the US who are judged ‘mentally deficient’ who have firearms. And they haven’t gone on a killing spree. Yet, for these rare instances where a person breaks the law, then breaks the law, then murders people (which is breaking the law too), people like this guy expect *everyone* in the country to surrender their rights to self-defense?
Heck, it sounds like *he* is mentally deficient and should be denied his right to self defense….
February 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
He certainly should be denied access to a computer or typewriter as an agent of any type of journalism.