1969912 0 #1 January 10, 2008 The President signed H.R. 2640 this past monday. In general, the resolution will make pre-purchase NICS checks more effective in identifying persons who are currently disqualified under the 1968 GCA due to mental health issues. Based on a quick look at the legislation, it makes sense to me, but will not prevent much, if any, crime. Here's what the NRA-ILA says: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018 Here's the text of H.R 2640: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.2640: --------------- Any opinions? "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #2 January 10, 2008 QuoteAny opinions? I hope this will cause some of the Anti-gunners to shut their fucking quiche holes.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #3 January 10, 2008 Lemme read through it and get back to you, but off the top of my head, I can see problems with HIPAA.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #4 January 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteAny opinions? I hope this will cause some of the Anti-gunners to shut their fucking quiche holes. FFC (Fat Fucking Chance). "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #5 January 10, 2008 Ok.... from reading the NRA-ILA synopsis and a quick scan of the bill itself, it looks like overall it could be a good thing - it removes a few of the obstacles in "clearing your name" from the Brady Act. I'm still not sure how they're going to manage it, though. That type of information would be considered private and protected under HIPAA, I believe.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #6 January 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteAny opinions? I hope this will cause some of the Anti-gunners to shut their fucking quiche holes. In a short time, they will say that the laws don't go far enough. After a madman goes nuts and shoots up another campus. Prospective madmen will need to be banned... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #7 January 10, 2008 QuoteOk.... from reading the NRA-ILA synopsis and a quick scan of the bill itself, it looks like overall it could be a good thing - it removes a few of the obstacles in "clearing your name" from the Brady Act. I'm still not sure how they're going to manage it, though. That type of information would be considered private and protected under HIPAA, I believe. Yep the "clearing your name" part is important. Not sure about HIPAA, but some (many? most?) states currently provide that information under NICS checks. The 2005 rev of ATF form 4473 doesn't look like it has any text related to waiving rights under HIPAA. Perhaps the HIPAA law allows for disclosure to LE agencies in certain cases. Good point. ------- "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #8 January 10, 2008 I honestly don't know - it'll be interesting to see how it shakes down. ACLU will be against it (other than the fact that it's a gun law that ISN'T more restrictive) if it even gets close to HIPAA, I guarantee.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #9 January 10, 2008 QuoteProspective madmen will need to be banned And this is the problem with an effective gun control law. It's impossible to know just who will snap and blow away his/her spouse, children, co-workers, fellow students. Gun law opponets scream that gun laws only take guns out of the "law abiding" citizens hands and does nothing to keep them from criminals where as proponets says that any person can become that criminal, providing they have the gun to shoot someone with. Giving the right circumstances, I'm sure near anyone could "snap" for a brief moment and shoot another person. Anyone who says that they have never briefly entertained the thought of killing someone is probably lying. It's safe to say that most will never go past that thought and actually do it but, there are those who do. According to DoJ statistics most murders are done by those close to you. I would assume that the majority were legal gun owners and not criminals. I would assume that the majority were also everyday normal people who, under the right circumstances, just snapped and went off the deep end. I would also assume that if they didn't have a gun they would had possibly used something else such as a knife or baseball bat. Truth is, those who will kill will kill regardless if they have a gun or not. I do believe that safe guards are needed to pin point the obvious mental cases but, they're not going to catch them all and difinitely not going to weed out those who are fine today but may snap next week under the right circumstances. I think the gun control issue will wage on for years to come and will never be fully resolved."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #10 January 10, 2008 QuoteProspective madmen will need to be banned... One of the very worst things to happen in this country is to close so many of the institutions that used to house the criminally insane as well as most of the people we call homeless now. That was due to budgetary cuts and politicians who felt they were not needed. I would rather see the whack jobs in a nice mental institution than out on the streets doing crime... at least in the mental institutions.... they have a warm bed... food.. and hopefully ONLY the proper drugs to medicate them into enough of a stupor so they have some semblance of a quality of life instead of druggin and robbin and self medicating with the proceeds of their crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #11 January 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteProspective madmen will need to be banned... One of the very worst things to happen in this country is to close so many of the institutions that used to house the criminally insane as well as most of the people we call homeless now. That was due to budgetary cuts and politicians who felt they were not needed. I would rather see the whack jobs in a nice mental institution than out on the streets doing crime... at least in the mental institutions.... they have a warm bed... food.. and hopefully ONLY the proper drugs to medicate them into enough of a stupor so they have some semblance of a quality of life instead of druggin and robbin and self medicating with the proceeds of their crime. You are right. My wife is in the mental health field (she married me, didn't she?) and they recently closed a mental hospital here and moved the patients "into the community". Reason? Mainly, people don't like paying taxes. So go introduce yourself to your paranoid delusional neighbor, you cheap bastard! -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gene03 0 #12 January 11, 2008 Yup. MADNESS IN THE STREETS How Psychiatry and the Law abandoned the Mentally Ill. Rael Jean Isaac Virginia C. Armat ISBN 0-02-915380-8 A sad read. Hijack over.“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him. Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
