Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: White House announces two new 'executive actions' on guns [View all]X_Digger
(18,585 posts)29. Ahh, so a change to USC 922. That clarifies a lot.
The revised definition clarifies that the statutory terms adjudicated as a mental defective and committed to a mental institution include persons who are found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect; persons lacking mental responsibility or deemed insane; and persons found guilty but mentally ill, regardless of whether these determinations are made by a state, local, federal or military court. The proposed regulation also clarifies that the statutory term includes a person committed to involuntary inpatient or outpatient treatment.
The only thing I can see that gives me pause is a scenario like the following: Let's say a father finds his daughter being sexually abused and kills the abuser, but is found not guilty by reason of temporary insanity. That person would never be able to own a gun.
Which gets to a bigger point..
The 1968 GCA was written when the typical 'treatment' for mental illness was involuntary commitment, frequently for decades of a patient's life. There was little understanding about actual treatment- if you were broken, you could never be fixed.
That's a perception that lingers in popular culture today. However, we've come a long way in effectively treating depression and suicidal ideation among other mental conditions that might make one a danger to themselves or others.
The GCA needs to be updated to match the current realities in clinical treatment. It's not an easy challenge, but it needs to be done.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Thanks. I agree. I've seen some charge $35, but even paying that is responsible thing to do.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#53
And if the state governments really cared they wouldn't require you to go just to an FFL
Glassunion
Jan 2014
#67
That's good too. But, if the state doesn't, what do you think a so-called responsible gun owner
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#73
Gun fanciers have been a bit out there too. I think if one has a DUI, they should not be able
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#5
How many innocent folks get killed, wounded, intimidated by a shoplifter or jaywalker?
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#72
Apparently you are living in Wayne's World. It has gone exactly 180 degrees
madinmaryland
Jan 2014
#41
Not an executive order, but "statements", it's posted at the WH website here are
HereSince1628
Jan 2014
#8
Below is a link to the full White House fact sheet regarding the 'executive actions'
Tx4obama
Jan 2014
#13
I know, you guys will find a way to rationalise taking the cash. Never had any doubt.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#35
Details matter, Hoyt. Bloviating and hand-wringing don't actually *do* anything.
X_Digger
Jan 2014
#37
The only aspect of the problem that concerns you is how to protect your access to gunz and
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#39
I don't know that there is a national standard for outpatient commitment.
HereSince1628
Jan 2014
#16
Well, as long as there's an actual judicial hearing, with proper representation..
X_Digger
Jan 2014
#26
Hey gun fanciers use autos, flashlights, fire extinguishers, hammers, etc., to rationalize their
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#38
At least he's not trying to defend something that should be taboo in a civilized society - more
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#47
Well, I don't see this as a wider range of records, but more of the records that the law intended..
X_Digger
Jan 2014
#28