In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Who should be allowed to buy guns?
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Who should be allowed to buy guns? Two tragedies reignite the debate over the privacy of mental-health patients and the safety of the community. By Ralph Vigoda INQUIRER STAFF WRITER Michael Burgess, 44, suffered from depression, was on medication, and had sought psychiatric counseling.George Karl Hahn, 24, thought his neighbors were spying on him through his television and was ordered by a judge to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.The fact that their histories did not prevent either man from buying a gun in Pennsylvania has ignited anew a tricky and controversial debate on what should be put first: the desire to protect the privacy of an individual, or the effort to ensure the safety of a community.In October, Burgess purchased a Bryco Arms 9mm semiautomatic handgun. In November, Hahn bought a Glock 9mm semiautomatic handgun. Last week, both men used their weapons with tragic results. Burgess killed four members of his family and himself in their Ardmore home. Hahn left a stranger in the Granite Run Mall parking lot in critical condition after shooting him four times, then drove to his Norwood home and shot himself in the head.Those in the gun-control debate who want to make it harder for people with mental-health problems to get handguns see the incidents as proof that stricter rules are needed. That thinking, though, is parried by mental-health advocates, who fear the added stigma that would result if a person had to admit to past mental instability, and by Second Amendment absolutists for whom buying and carrying a gun is a sacred right."This has been a recurring issue," said Darrell O'Connor, an agent with the Philadelphia office of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. "The ATF has established some guidelines for states to follow, but it's up to each state to determine how they handle record-keeping."In Pennsylvania, where gun applications go through the state police, the wording on the form that deals with mental health disallows only those who have been adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution.In New Jersey, the language is tougher. Two questions on the application ask whether a person has been confined to a mental institution for treatment on an inpatient or outpatient basis. A yes to either query suspends the procedure until the applicant gives state police a doctor's letter indicating the person is no longer suffering problems that would pose a risk.Sgt. Mike Aneskewich of the New Jersey State Police firearms investigation unit said that, had either Burgess or Hahn been in New Jersey and answered the questions honestly, he likely would have been turned down. Both states allow appeals.Perhaps the nation's strongest law is in Connecticut, where police can seize a person's guns after a state's attorney or two police officers tell a judge they believe the gun owner is a danger to himself or the community. Such concerns must be prompted by "clear and convincing evidence" after a police investigation and can be prompted by information from a family member. A hearing must be held within 14 days in which a prosecutor must prove the threat of imminent danger; if not, the guns are returned. Recent violent actions, alcohol or substance abuse, involuntary confinement for psychiatric disorders, and cruelty to animals all can lead to confiscation.The law was passed in 1999 after a shooting a year earlier in which a man, who had twice been committed to a psychiatric hospital yet had a gun permit, killed four people and himself in the offices of the state lottery.Such a law theoretically could have helped in the Burgess and Hahn cases - assuming the families were aware that the men had guns and had tipped law enforcement. Burgess' wife had twice called police to the home after arguments, but said the altercations weren't physical and declined to seek a protection-from-abuse order. Hahn's father, George Hahn Jr., said he and his wife were frustrated in their efforts to get help for their son, who had a quick temper and who was spiraling downward."Mental health needs to be addressed. I'm disgusted in the system," said Hahn, 58, who added that he was unaware of his son's gun purchase.Pennsylvania state Rep. T.J. Rooney (D., Bethlehem), who co-chairs the Common Sense Firearms Safety Caucus, a bipartisan group seeking to reduce gun violence, would like to add more stringent language to the state's statute that would flag a potential gun owner who has chronic mental illness and could pose a threat."We're not talking about precluding someone from owning firearms because at some point in their past they suffered a bout of depression," he said. "I just think that something that might be beyond the norm should be taken into account."But it's an almost impossible task, he said, given the strength of gun lobbyists, led by the National Rifle Association, and the popularity of hunting in the state."Anything you would try to do would be called a backdoor means to keep people from owning guns," Rooney said. "I couldn't even get a parental-accountability law passed, so I can't even envision a scenario where this issue would take priority. It would be viewed as a fool's errand."And there are those who think going further would be a mistake."It's not an easy issue, and I don't want to minimize the tragic circumstances out of which the question arises," said Bob Carolla of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) in Arlington, Va. "But the perspective that NAMI comes from is that the best indicator that gives any prediction of whether or not a person has a potential for violence is past violent behavior. And that does not, in any way, mean a diagnosis of mental illness. People with mental illness generally are no more violent than anyone else in the population."Joseph Rogers, president and CEO of the Mental Health Association of Southeastern Pennsylvania, a patients' rights advocacy group, sees tougher laws creating a nightmare that would ultimately hurt those with mental illness."If you get help or take an antidepressant, should you be put in a data base that authorities can access and use to say you can't buy a gun?" he asked. "That won't prevent guns from getting into the hands of the people who abuse the privilege, but it would prevent people who need help from getting help. It's very stigmatizing and destructive to our efforts."Yet people such as Bryan Miller, of Cease Fire New Jersey, a volunteer organization that rallies against gun violence, say tough choices have to be made."I'm sorry if I appear callous, but to me, if you weigh some kind of theoretical stigma over having to admit to mental problems versus the five people that died in Ardmore and the poor guy at the mall, it's public safety that's more important. "And public safety means some people shouldn't have handguns." http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2002/01/24/front_page/SSHOOT24.htm
Comments
"The 2nd Amendment is about defense, not hunting. Long live the gun shows, and reasonable access to FFLs. Join the NRA -- I'm a Life Member."
when all else fails........................