Posts Tagged ‘gun background check’

GOP to Look at Brady Gun Laws and Background Check Effectiveness

Thursday, January 27th, 2011

Staffers from the House Judiciary Committee will meet with Obama administration officials Thursday, January 27, to examine the effectiveness of federal laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, according to a Republican aide with the panel.

The closed-door gathering will focus on whether a federal system of background checks is working to block gun sales to the mentally ill and others barred from owning firearms, the aide said Tuesday. The meeting comes three weeks after a shooting rampage in Arizona killed a federal judge, left a congresswoman seriously wounded and reignited the public debate over whether laws need to be tightened to prevent gun sales to those with mental problems.

Staff at Thursday’s meeting will consider whether the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is effective. The system is an FBI-run database created by the 1993 Brady Handgun violence Prevention Act — a law named after former President Reagan’s press secretary, James Brady, who was seriously injured during the 1981 assassination attempt on Reagan.

Under current law, licensed gun dealers are required to screen potential buyers through NICS to ensure they don’t fit one of the categories barring them from purchasing firearms, including felons, illegal immigrants, spousal abusers and the mentally ill. The system is largely voluntary, however, as states are encouraged — but not required — to report information to NICS.

The holes in the screening system became evident in 2007, when Seung-Hui Cho, a 23-year-old Virginia Tech student, killed 32 students and teachers in one of the deadliest shooting rampages in the nation’s history. Although a judge had declared Cho mentally ill two years earlier, the state did not report its evaluation to NICS, allowing Cho to pass a background check by a licensed dealer.

Following the Virginia Tech tragedy, Congress unanimously passed a law designed to bolster the NICS system by providing states with financial incentives to report records of mental illness (and other red-flag cases) to the FBI. The NICS Improvement Amendments Act was supported by the NRA and signed by then-President George W. Bush in early 2008, but reporting by states remains voluntary.

Different state privacy laws, budget restraints and political considerations have hampered the effectiveness of the enhanced reporting. Indeed, through August of last year, 10 states had not reported any
cases of mental illness to NICS, while 28 states had submitted fewer than 100 records, according to Mayors Against Illegal Guns, an advocacy group.

On Monday, Mayors Against Illegal Guns — a group headed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino — introduced a proposal to require states to report mental health records, drug-abuse histories, domestic violence cases and other red flags to NICS. The proposal would also require unlicensed gun dealers to perform NICS background checks — a step not mandated under current law.

“While I support the Second Amendment rights of responsible, law-abiding Americans, I also support tough, common-sense laws to keep guns out of the hands of felons, drug abusers, the mentally ill and other dangerous people,” Grant Woods, former Republican attorney general of Arizona, said in endorsing the Bloomberg proposal.

NICS funding is also an issue Judiciary will examine Thursday. Although the post-Virginia Tech law authorized $188 million for NICS in fiscal 2009, and another $375 million in fiscal 2010, Congress
appropriated only $10 million and $20 million, respectively — or 5.3 percent of each year’s authorization.

With Republicans controlling the House, even the most vocal gun-control advocates have been pessimistic about the chances of any gun reforms moving in the 112th Congress — even after the near-assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), deflected questions to the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the gun-reform issue.

President Obama invoked Giffords’s spirit during Tuesday’s State of the Union address but made no mention of gun reform — a silence that irritated gun-control advocates on and off Capitol Hill. “I’m disappointed, but not surprised,” Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a longtime gun-reform proponent, said after the speech. David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser, said Tuesday
that the disappointment is premature. “[Obama's] going to address this,” Plouffe told NBC’s Brian Williams.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Virginia Tech Victims Families ask Government to Fix Background Checks for Guns

Monday, January 24th, 2011

WASHINGTON — In the wake of the Tucson, Arizona shootings, in which a gunman killed six people and injured 13 others, family members of victims in the mass 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech are urging Congress to fix a gun background-check system that often allows people to buy firearms even after they have been convicted of crimes or judged mentally ill.

Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and others, fits the profile to be denied gun ownership under federal law. He has a documented history of drug abuse, including a 2007 arrest on drug charges. But like Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho, Loughner was able to slip through the cracks and purchase a gun because of missing records in the background-check system that federally-licensed gun dealers consult before selling a weapon.

Congress has attempted to solve this problem before, but with unsatisfying results. In the months following the Virginia Tech shooting, lawmakers passed a bill meant to increase the number of records entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Lori Haas, whose daughter Emily survived being shot twice in the head at Virgina Tech, said the weekend’s events should renew focus on the need for Congress to implement stronger gun control. Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, purchased a gun over the counter despite being found a danger to himself in court in 2005, which should have disqualified him from such a purchase.

“When mentally ill people get their hands on a gun, something is wrong with the system.”

Since 2007, Congress has provided only a small amount of the funds it promised states to improve documentation in the background-check system.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Colorado Criminal Background Checks and Guns

Monday, October 4th, 2010

It appears folks in Colorado, especially Pueblo county, are jumping onto the firearms bandwagon in droves. The past 2guns-and-criminal-background-check-in-colorado years, since the election of Barack Obama, the sales of firearms across the country has sky-rocketed. In fact, Winchester reported at one point, their factories were going flat out, and they still couldn’t keep up. The number of criminal background checks has also seen a major increase, along with the revenues that accompany any such change.

In Pueblo county, Colorado, the Sheriff’s office issued 380 permits in 2008, and 545 in 2009. That’s a 43% increase in a state where it’s already legal to openly carry a firearm. It also the largest increase in a 7 year period. This is also no doubt a boon for Colorado itself as a criminal background check for this procedure cost upwards of $150, and pays for a CBI background check, a photo identification card and the processing of fingerprints. Information is also sent to the federal Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for background and registration purposes.

“I have given out more concealed handgun permits than in the history of the county of Pueblo. That’s six or seven permits a day,” first-term Sheriff Kirk Taylor said the week of September 27. Taylor also said he is amazed at the spike in permits but didn’t call it concerning.

Of course, as mentioned thousands of times before, so far without any evidence, many believe that President Barack Obama is a threat to the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

“I think the election was the catalyst to the hysteria. That and a lot of misinformation about concealed handguns,” said Taylor, a Democrat who said he’s a “strong” supporter of the Second Amendment.
In Colorado there appear to be two major misconceptions that people have about their rights to firearms, and were explained in further detail by Sheriff Taylor. These include having a gun in a vehicle, and bearing a firearm on oneself.

People think you need a concealed handgun permit to carry a gun in your car. By law, you can carry a gun in your car because it’s an extension of your house,” he said.

Colorado is also an open-carry state, which means you can openly carry a firearm, except in places where it’s prohibited, like the courthouse and schools. Now, if you walk down the street with a .45 strapped to your leg, that doesn’t mean a citizen isn’t going to call you in to the police, but you can openly carry a firearm in Colorado.”

I personally think openly carrying a firearm in this day and age should NOT be legal. This is mainly because most people are on a knife edge about terrorism and recent mass murders, and would no doubt literally go ballistic if encountering someone with a 45 strapped to their hip.

Out of the 545 concealed carry permits issued in Pueblo County, Colorado last year, only six of them were denied a permit, which was probably based on a criminal background check. Those who have been denied a permit can appeal to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

In Colorado, you can also conduct a personal criminal background check fairly simply using the state’s court system. I have written an article on how to get started with this here.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Chicago Gun Ordinance May Be a Direct Violation of 2nd Amendment Rights

Monday, July 12th, 2010

CHICAGO – A new gun ordinance in Chicago that is being touted as the strictest of its kind in the entire United

The ordinance permits residents to have only one working gun at a time in their homes and prohibits them from stepping outside…even onto their porches or in their garages…with a handgun. You think this will make folks angry?

Following the lead of Washington, D.C., which enacted a strict ordinance after the Supreme Court struck down its gun ban two years ago, Chicago also requires prospective gun owners to take a class and receive firearms training.

Chicago’s ordinance also bans gun shops from setting up shop in the city and bars anyone convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or two or more convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs from owning a handgun. Basically, you will be under the scrutiny of some pretty serious background check procedures.

However, Chicago is allowing for a 90-day grace period in which residents who owned handguns illegally during the ban can register them without penalty.

Chicago’s ordinance was widely criticized by gun rights advocates, who have said the city is simply trying to make it as difficult as it can for people to own guns and putting up unconstitutional roadblocks in their way. They promised lawsuits and last week, even before the ordinance went into effect, at least two lawsuits were filed challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance.

City officials have said they believe the lawsuit is constitutional and that the Supreme Court specifically ruled that local jurisdictions have the right to impose reasonable regulations and restrictions.

Personally, I see this type of legislation as a direct attack on my right to bear arms, and is just paving the way for increased control. Some time ago I wrote about gun legislation in Arizona that would allow guns in establishments that serve alcohol. While I also didn’t agree with that, I think that these types of legislation on opposite extremes of gun control help ensure there is indeed middle ground left.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Historic Defeat for Gun Lobby Regarding Weapons Laws

Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

The nation dodged a bullet Wednesday. In a rare defeat for the powerful gun lobby, the Senate routed an amendment that would have federalized concealed-weapons laws by forcing all states that issue such permits to gun owners to honor those granted by other states. States with strict rules regarding concealed firearms, such as California, essentially would have had their laws nullified by states with lax rules. Yet so spineless have gun-control advocates in Congress been in recent years that there was no guarantee common sense would trump political cowardice. It was a nailbiter, but the amendment failed on a 58-39 vote.

Technorati Tags: , , ,