A push for tighter background checks...what do you think that will mean?

[T.O.M.]

I keep reading how Obama and other political types are pushing for "tighter background checks."  What do you think that will mean?  This lunatic in Aurora, Colordao passed NICS checks, because he has no priors.  There's already the issue of mental health issues being protected by HIPPA vs. the need to make such information available in a background check for firearms.  Don't know where the political types, especially on the left side of the aisle, would fall in a debate of privacy on health related issues vs. a need to put important information on file for background check purposes.  Fingerprinting wouldn't have much of an impact, other than to impose a waiting period on the process.

What do you think?  Now I know that Obama is really in favor of more gun control legislation, but he is politically savvy enough to avoid saying in public that he favors bans on EBR's, etc.  So, he says he's in favor of tighter background checks instead,  hoping to not offend gun owners and potential gun owners to the point of risking his re-election bid.  But I've got to wonder what he/they are thinking...

[HankB]

Putting more "mental health" assessments into the mix means a person's rights will be dependent in many cases on what amounts to pseudoscientific quackery. (I've read serious stories over the past few years that assert those who doubt anthropogenic global warming - "deniers" - are mentally ill.)

Or consider the "No Fly List" . . . some folks end up on it because anonymous bureaucrats using secret criteria decided they were a danger.

Or so they claim.

It would be a left-wing bureaucrat's wet dream to put in a similar "No Gun List" to strip large numbers of people with NO criminal background of their rights . . . maybe simple membership in an unapproved organization (NRA? SCI?) or posting in inappropriate forums (APS? THR?) could earn a person such a listing.

[kgbsquirrel]

What do you think that will mean?  

WAG: Possibly including, but not limited to, involuntary divulging of private medical records along with a gross reworking of the background check system. diagnosed with mild depression that's being treated successfully with simple SSRI's? Medically disqualified. Treated for PTSD before leaving the military? "Adjudicated" mentally defective (by a government functionary with no accountability). Member of a "trrist" organization like the Oathkeepers or Tea Party? Disqualified.

And some other odious things that popped into my head: Change the potential max-penalties for the most common misdemeanors to a year plus a day. Label anyone who has had to take narcotics for control of chronic pain as "addicted" to them. Change the dishonorable discharge disqualification to include any discharge other than honorable. Oh hell, since this is a worst case what-if, just make any service in the military a disqualifying status.

And of course there's ye olde Atlas Shrugged tactic of just making so much asinine crap illegal that everyone can be made a criminal on the spot as needed and thus have those evil baby-murdering guns taken away from them.


ETA: Not background checks in general, but a sudden push to have roaming TSA teams stopping people at "safety checkpoints" to see if they're carrying CCW or somesuch. Yeah, I'm tired, about to go to bed, and have the worst case scenario bits running around in head at the moment. Peace out, all.

[Ben]

Maybe it will mean that like with Obamacare, we will redefine adulthood to over age 26. From an article on Obama's thoughts post-Aurora:

"We must also understand that when a child opens fire on other children, there's a hole in his heart that no government can fill."

And then this (funny, I don't remember any mention of Holmes having an AK-47 - the "journalists and guns" poster comes to mind):

"I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms," Obama said. "But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/25/obama-talks-limiting-some-gun-use-in-wake-colorado-massacre/#ixzz21jgLemES

[MrsSmith]

Mental health is too open to interpretation to be the basis of determining someone's individual rights.

I took a stress test a while back in which you were to tick off items from a list if they'd happened to you within the previous 12 months.
Divorce, check. Immediate family member undergoing surgery or other serious health issue, check. Child reaching legal age and moving out, check times 3. Death of a pet, check. Household move, check. Loss of job, check. There were more. At the end, weight is applied to each item and you're given a score. A score of 300 was considered extremely high stress, even health endangering. My score was 900. What if they had used that to determine my ability to purchase a gun? Yeah, I was stressed, not sleeping well, fighting depression tooth and nail, but at no time did I ever contemplate suicide or homicide, nor would I ever. And you know if they decide to do mental health checks, some sociopaths are going to breeze right through it, but worse than that, who knows what cracked philosophy they'd use to make the determination - it's not like we'd have any say at all in the matter.

As to the AK47s, what an idiot. I swear not a day goes by when I don't think one headline or another is like a scene from a really stupid movie.

I saw a post on facebook the other day for one of the libertarian pages. I'm going to flub the words a bit so they don't attract search engines or enigma.    Support our troupes. We'll need them to over. thro. are. guv. Laughed my arse off.

[HankB]

Mental health is too open to interpretation to be the basis of determining someone's individual rights.

What you see as a problem, bureaucrats see as an opportunity.

[Monkeyleg]

I wonder if Obama could pass a mental health test, given that he's delusional, thinking that there's 57 states, that he killed bin Laden himself, that he can make the oceans rise and fall, etc.

[slingshot]

The answer to all things medical in terms of records...Obama Care.  It will eventually provide the foundation for mental health background checks.  You add in family history, genetic indicators and perscription drug use and you have the foundation for background checks along with the current NICs check information.

[RoadKingLarry]

Obviously anyone that would want an evil dangerous gun must have some type of mental aberration and therefor is prohibited from owning a gun.

[lee n. field]

I keep reading how Obama and other political types are pushing for "tighter background checks."  What do you think that will mean?  This lunatic in Aurora, Colordao passed NICS checks, because he has no priors.  There's already the issue of mental health issues being protected by HIPPA vs. the need to make such information available in a background check for firearms.  

If Mr. Demonic Nutjob had no mental health prior history, WTH good would that have done?

Putting more "mental health" assessments into the mix means a person's rights will be dependent in many cases on what amounts to pseudoscientific quackery.

That too, squared.

[longeyes]

Two government-paid shrinks will decide if you're a threat to Progress.

[T.O.M.]

There you go...you need to have proof that you aren't suffering from a mental health problem before you are cleared.  Prove you're sane, and you can buy a gun.

[makattak]

I'm surprised no one's suggested this yet: He means to force EVERY firearm transfer to go through a background check.

No more private sales.

[Hutch]

If they would just beef up the NICS system, and allow us peons to use it, I would be glad to.  But... Nooooooooo, we can't be havin' any o' THAT now, can we?

[red headed stranger]

I'm surprised no one's suggested this yet: He means to force EVERY firearm transfer to go through a background check.

No more private sales.

This is my thought.  "Tighter background checks" is the new "close the gunshow loophole." 

[MrsSmith]

I'm surprised no one's suggested this yet: He means to force EVERY firearm transfer to go through a background check.

No more private sales.

And there begins the US black market we were discussing recently.

[Jamisjockey]

And there begins the US black market we were discussing recently.

Private sales are already a black market to avoid background checks, databases, taxes and fees.

[Jamisjockey]

I'm surprised no one's suggested this yet: He means to force EVERY firearm transfer to go through a background check.

No more private sales.

Dollars to donuts that's on the table.  Nevermind that orange hair passed three NICS checks.

[MrsSmith]

Friend of mine who works in a gun store in Savannah posted on FB today that thanks to Blomberg's and Obama's statements, he's made some killer commissions this week, just on EBRs.

[MechAg94]

I just got asked by a friend to go with him to a big gun show coming up to help him buy an AR.  Another friend was seriously looking at the Sig AR that WalMart has locally.

[wmenorr67]

Gun show here in Tulsa this weekend.  Might go just to see the crowd.

[RoadKingLarry]

Are you running low on jerky and beanie babies?

[Perd Hapley]

I wonder if Obama could pass a mental health test, given that he's a leftist and therefore delusional, thinking that there's 57 states, that he killed bin Laden himself, that he can make the oceans rise and fall, etc.

Better.

[geronimotwo]

Putting more "mental health" assessments into the mix means a person's rights will be dependent in many cases on what amounts to pseudoscientific quackery. (I've read serious stories over the past few years that assert those who doubt anthropogenic global warming - "deniers" - are mentally ill.)

Or consider the "No Fly List" . . . some folks end up on it because anonymous bureaucrats using secret criteria decided they were a danger.

Or so they claim.

It would be a left-wing bureaucrat's wet dream to put in a similar "No Gun List" to strip large numbers of people with NO criminal background of their rights . . . maybe simple membership in an unapproved organization (NRA? SCI?) or posting in inappropriate forums (APS? THR?) could earn a person such a listing.

like if someone has more than one gun.........NUTSO!!!!

Q@

[TechMan]

like if someone has more than one gun.........NUTSO!!!!

Q@

So every member of this board is NUTSO?