Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks
|
| Posted
:
Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:17:38 GMT |
| Author
:
Violence Policy Center |
| Category
:
Press Release |
| News
Alerts by Email click
here ) |
|
|
|
News |
Home
|
|
|
WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Leading national gun violence prevention organizations today warned that a bill intended to improve the records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) -- the national system used to screen gun buyers -- has been hijacked by the gun lobby and would now do far more harm than good.
The "NICS Improvement Act" passed today by the Senate would:
-- Resuscitate a failed government program that spent millions of dollars annually to allow persons prohibited from buying guns to regain the ability to legally acquire firearms. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would be required to establish a "relief from disability" program to allow persons now prohibited from possessing a firearm because they have "been adjudicated as a mental defective" or "committed to a mental institution" to apply to have their bar on firearms possession removed. As a result of the bill, more than 116,000 individuals would be eligible to apply. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) used to run a similar program that, in addition to those with mental disabilities, even allowed felons to apply for "relief." Annual costs for the ATF program ballooned to more than $4 million in 1991, with an average cost of $4,800 per applicant and 43 full-time employees dedicated to processing the applications. Congress shut down the ATF program in 1992 because of its high cost, inefficiency, and threat to public safety. Under the bill, states would also be required to establish such "relief" programs to restore the gun privileges of those with mental health disabilities in order to be eligible for potential grant money to upgrade records submitted to the NICS.
-- Set an arbitrary time limit for the VA to act on applications for "relief." If the agency fails to act within 365 days, applicants could file a lawsuit asking a court to restore their gun privileges, even if Congress fails to provide the VA with the appropriate resources to process these investigations. Some prevailing applicants would be entitled to attorneys' fees. This provision is contrary to a unanimous 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ATF's failure to act on a relief application from a felon (because of lack of appropriations) did not constitute a denial that would entitle the applicant to judicial review. The decision noted that courts are ill-equipped to make decisions on individual applications for "relief" under the standards that would apply under the "NICS Improvement Act," stating: "Whether an applicant is `likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety' presupposes an inquiry into that applicant's background -- a function best performed by the Executive, which, unlike courts, is institutionally equipped for conducting a neutral, wide-ranging investigation. Similarly, the `public interest' standard calls for an inherently policy-based decision best left in the hands of an agency."
-- Significantly narrow the category of records of people with mental disabilities that would be submitted to the NICS by the federal government. The current permanent bar on persons with certain health disabilities would be replaced with temporary restrictions.
Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, states, "This bill was intended to be Congress' response to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech that left 32 people murdered. But rather than focusing on improving the current laws prohibiting people with certain mental health disabilities from buying guns, the bill is now nothing more than a gun lobby wish list. It will waste millions of taxpayer dollars restoring the gun privileges of persons previously determined to present a danger to themselves or others. Once a solution, the bill is now part of the problem."
Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, "It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced the Senate into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need."
Robyn Thomas, executive director of the Legal Community Against Violence, comments, "The bill's original intent, to increase reporting of state records to the NICS database, is an important objective that would improve enforcement of federal laws governing persons prohibited from possessing firearms. The changes made by the gun lobby risk undermining those laws, and we call on the House to have a full debate on the merits of this legislation."
Violence Policy Center
|
Copyright © 2008
PR Newswire. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Bravery in the absence of rebuttal
By:
Silence Dogood ,
Fri, 21 Dec 2007 04:07:55 GMT |
|
Not ONE rebuttal argument, so much for unbiased articles from your organization.
Interesting that even with all the alarmist rhetoric, where are the statistics that support this position, oh that's right statistics don't matter when they don't agree with your completely hysterical rantings. Ever cared to actually take a look at the stats of law abiding gun owners, the stats that show just how magnificently law abiding they are? No, I suppose not.
Let's see, VPC and Brady warned hysterically when Florida passed its concealed carry law,"rivers of blood" I believe was a phrase that was used. As it turns out, well, that just did not happen. oops. What DID happen was a MEASURABLE decrease in violent crime against the person. Then, the Castle Doctrine law came around recently, here comes that "river of blood" promise again...oops, didn't happen again. So just how much credibility do you have left? I guess when your audience is more than willing to listen to your BS wihout questioning it, I guess that's enough for you.
Disarming Americans is not a process it is an element of a result you desire. You are in the business of turning Human Beings into pets to be custodially cared for by a socialist government. Yeah, that worked out great for the USSR and its satellite countries.
Being a Socialist wasn't cool when it was a clearly identified enemy and it's not cool now. There is an element of the American nature that will forever resist that. No matter how much you want the whole country to become some Socialist enitity, whether you want to encourage it by quietly seeking the submission of the citizenry through gun control or anything else, it will ultimately fail. To presume to subjugate us is folly. I would suggest take up fishing, because your efforts to sheep the American citizen has already failed, you just can't admit it to yourself yet.
|
|
hate mongers
By:
mike hunt ,
Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:26:13 GMT |
|
sounds like common sense gun control measure to me. one should not discriminate or chastise mental illness. people with mental illnesses are not handicapped, they are handi-abled. the Violence Policy Center is an extremist organisation that spews hate speech
|
|
Gun Lobby so called hijack
By:
Uncle Lar ,
Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:19:03 GMT |
|
So, if I understand the VPC position, they are upset that the bill gives anyone redress against being mistakenly put on the prohibited list. If the point is to exclude the maximum number of citizens from gun ownership, that makes perfect sense. If it's to prevent legitimately proscribed persons from purchasing firearms from a legal source then preventing the correction of mistakes or errors would seem petty and vindictive.
So why not just come out and admit that the real goal of the VPC is to disarm every common ordinary citizen, a move that has worked ever so well in places like DC and Chicago.
|
|
gun control
By:
clell ,
Thu, 20 Dec 2007 05:19:59 GMT |
|
Remove all gun control. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand. We were a safer country before 1968.
Besides, the right to self defense is God given, not government given.
|
|
and I used to oppose this bill...
By:
Carl in Chicago ,
Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:08:37 GMT |
|
I used to oppose this bill, and was alarmed by the notion that McCarthy and Schumer were working with second amendment advocates.
Now that the Violence Policy Center, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and the Legal Community Against Violence is bemoaning the bill, I am rethinking my position on it.
I say that because without a doubt, those three organizations' (bankrolled by the Joyce Foundation) number one goal is not to reduce violence in America. It's to reduce the number of gun owners in America (including and especially, law-abiding ones).
|
|
|
|
|