Sadly, now it is time for the bad
news; the flaws to this section of President Obama’s action plan. Forgive me if I am a little harsh, but I was
pretty nice in my last post so I have to keep some form of balance.
One of the more spotty areas of
closing the gaps on background checks is “Improve incentives for states to share
information with the background check system” including any personal
information that disqualifies you from purchasing a firearm. Only a few things will cause you to be
rejected from purchasing a firearm; these include:
·
Felons
·
Fugitives from justice
·
Anyone who unlawfully uses any illegal drug,
including marijuana
·
The mentally ill (as determined by a court)
or someone who has been committed to a mental institution
·
Illegal aliens
·
Those dishonorably discharged
·
Anyone who renounced U.S. citizenship
·
Those under a restraining order for
harassment, stalking or threatening a partner
·
Those convicted of domestic violence, including
misdemeanor
According to William La
Jeunesse from Fox News, the two largest gaps in the NICS record-keeping database is
drug use and mental illness, even AFTER the Virginia Tech shooting, where the
student passed a background check for a firearm after a judge had legally
deemed him mentally ill. How was this
gap in records not a focus 6 years ago?
Just how many massacres need to happen before we think, “Hey, this is a
serious loophole.”?
As far as “giving incentives” to
states for providing this crucial information implies choice to me. Why would a state do something that takes
time and money and is a lot of work if they have the choice not to? It needs to be non-negotiable.
A 55-page report
went on to blast the states and federal government for failing to meet
congressional expectations.
It found, out of
1.1 million mental health records submitted from 2004 to 2011:
- 23 states and the District of Columbia had submitted fewer than 100
mental health records to the federal database.
- 17 states had submitted fewer than 10 mental health records.
- Four states had not submitted any.
These statistics
are more than pathetic. Like mental
health records, the Government Accountability Office found drug violations are
also under-reported. The agency said most states are not informing the FBI
(which is where the NICS gets their information) of failed drug tests, as the
federal background check law requires. It found:
- 44 states had submitted fewer than 10 records to the NICS
controlled-substance file.
- 33 states had not submitted any records even though the law bars
anyone with multiple arrests for drug use or possession within the past
five years, or those convicted for use or possession within the last year,
including marijuana. Yet the report found states with lengthy registries
of medical pot smokers did not provide that information to the NICS
system.
In the spirit of
“giving incentives” you would think there are negative outcomes if a state
doesn’t comply, right? The Department of
Justice has the power to give and take away funding for states compliance and
non-compliance. The
GAO audit found the DOJ forked out more than $25 million in grants, but did not
penalize one state for non-compliance.
This isn’t very surprising to me though, it is consistent with how our
President handles situations, I’m not sure he knows what “taking away funding”
actually means.
The last portion of this category will
be a brief stab at an obvious(and a little humorous) flaw. In President Obama’s action plan, under
background checks, his last paragraph talks about, “Make sure
dangerous people are prohibited from having guns:” DUH!! Does this even need to be stated? Maybe he put that paragraph in in case we
forgot what we were reading about a quarter of the way through.
In the category “Closing the
Loopholes in Background Checks” there are some great ideas on closing the gaps
that a lot of criminals can normally slip through, but there are some serious inconsistencies
that need a lot more though put into them.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/29/gun-debate-lawmakers-eye-troubled-background-check-system/
My sad suspicion is that the loopholes not only "benefit" private sellers and those who need to purchase anonymously, but someone, some group with real money/power -- otherwise this would have been done long ago. It could be groups who fear that if the government knows who has the guns, the guns could be confiscated. As for the states sharing information, I agree that it has to be compulsory with appropriate penalties for noncompliance, as well as financial support for the extra time/expenditures each state would have to make.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a very intricate and quite intimate dance being carried on by a variety of people in the halls of gun control. The states, whether they care to admit it or not, have been dance partners with the NRA via individual politicians, and special interest organizations.
ReplyDeleteWhile this performance is in effect, it will be extremely difficult to arrive at reasonable gun control.
I once read an anonymous quote: "The man who wants to direct the orchestra, must turn his back to the crowd."
There needs to be a selfless connection with the people and not selective special interests, in order to address, objectively, the issue of gun control. One of the problems with that is to get the people's (supposed) representatives, to remember the original purpose of their election, and wean themselves from special interest groups, namely, the NRA.
thats what happened in Australia, the polition that moved to get gun control thrown out and helped the prime minister do it, forever ruined his political career. he said he didn't regret it and that he did what politions are supposed to do, change their country for the better.
ReplyDelete