Graham introduces background check bill with NRA backing

[FishInTx]

I just hope this is the smallest of steps we can take because there will be more steps. This bill won't stop mass killings so the anti's will be back for more before long.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I just hope this is the smallest of steps we can take because there will be more steps. This bill won't stop mass killings so the anti's will be back for more before long.

You're right, it won't. But the hue and cry from the public is "do something" and this is something that Americans agree is preferable to limiting or banning guns, ammo or magazines. The ultimate but unachievable goal is to stop crazy people from killing. The backup plan is to stop the gun control train.

Chas.

[mamabearCali]

After reading the text of the bill three times I am inclined to say this is (at least on the face) mostly benign. It seems to just make states report things to the database that they should have already been reporting. I don't think it will do much either way. But as Mr. Cotton said it is doing "something" when the whole of the US was crying for "something" to be done.

I think a better "something" should be to have armed guards. But that is probably too pie in the sky.

[KaiserB]

What are the disqualifying mental illnesses and who determines who has those disqualifying illnesses? Does it matter to what degree someone must be ill with one of the illnesses to disqualify them from gun ownership?

.

That has ALREADY been defined. 30 seconds on Google will get you this:

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(7), a person is incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person:
(1) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition that causes or is likely to cause substantial impairment in judgment, mood, perception, impulse control, or intellectual ability;
(2) suffers from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subdivision (1) that:
(A) is in remission but is reasonably likely to redevelop at a future time; or
(B) requires continuous medical treatment to avoid redevelopment;
(3) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician, determined by a review board or similar authority, or declared by a court to be incompetent to manage the person's own affairs; or
(4) has entered in a criminal proceeding a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
(e) The following constitutes evidence that a person has a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d)(1):
(1) involuntary psychiatric hospitalization;
(2) psychiatric hospitalization;
(3) inpatient or residential substance abuse treatment in the preceding five-year period;
(4) diagnosis in the preceding five-year period by a licensed physician that the person is dependent on alcohol, a controlled substance, or a similar substance; or
(5) diagnosis at any time by a licensed physician that the person suffers or has suffered from a psychiatric disorder or condition consisting of or relating to:
(A) schizophrenia or delusional disorder;
(B) bipolar disorder;
(C) chronic dementia, whether caused by illness, brain defect, or brain injury;
(D) dissociative identity disorder;
(E) intermittent explosive disorder; or
(F) antisocial personality disorder.
(f) Notwithstanding Subsection (d), a person who has previously been diagnosed as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d) or listed in Subsection (e) is not because of that disorder or condition incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person provides the department with a certificate from a licensed physician whose primary practice is in the field of psychiatry stating that the psychiatric disorder or condition is in remission and is not reasonably likely to develop at a future time.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.
(h) The issuance of a license to carry a concealed handgun to a person eligible under Subsection (g) does not affect the person's ability to purchase a handgun or ammunition under federal law.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.03(a), 9.04(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 255, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 486, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146, Sec. 11.03, eff. September 1, 2009.

Once labeled a crazy always a crazy and pretty darned easy to get labeled that way.

There is already a method in the law to have these things reversed.

[KaiserB]

What are the disqualifying mental illnesses and who determines who has those disqualifying illnesses? Does it matter to what degree someone must be ill with one of the illnesses to disqualify them from gun ownership?

These details need to be ironed out before an informed decision can be made about whether this is a good idea or not. We don't need another pass it so we can find out what is in it law.

That has ALREADY been defined. 30 seconds on Google will get you this:

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(7), a person is incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person:
(1) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition that causes or is likely to cause substantial impairment in judgment, mood, perception, impulse control, or intellectual ability;
(2) suffers from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subdivision (1) that:
(A) is in remission but is reasonably likely to redevelop at a future time; or
(B) requires continuous medical treatment to avoid redevelopment;
(3) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician, determined by a review board or similar authority, or declared by a court to be incompetent to manage the person's own affairs; or
(4) has entered in a criminal proceeding a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
(e) The following constitutes evidence that a person has a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d)(1):
(1) involuntary psychiatric hospitalization;
(2) psychiatric hospitalization;
(3) inpatient or residential substance abuse treatment in the preceding five-year period;
(4) diagnosis in the preceding five-year period by a licensed physician that the person is dependent on alcohol, a controlled substance, or a similar substance; or
(5) diagnosis at any time by a licensed physician that the person suffers or has suffered from a psychiatric disorder or condition consisting of or relating to:
(A) schizophrenia or delusional disorder;
(B) bipolar disorder;
(C) chronic dementia, whether caused by illness, brain defect, or brain injury;
(D) dissociative identity disorder;
(E) intermittent explosive disorder; or
(F) antisocial personality disorder.
(f) Notwithstanding Subsection (d), a person who has previously been diagnosed as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d) or listed in Subsection (e) is not because of that disorder or condition incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person provides the department with a certificate from a licensed physician whose primary practice is in the field of psychiatry stating that the psychiatric disorder or condition is in remission and is not reasonably likely to develop at a future time.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.
(h) The issuance of a license to carry a concealed handgun to a person eligible under Subsection (g) does not affect the person's ability to purchase a handgun or ammunition under federal law.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.03(a), 9.04(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 255, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 486, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146, Sec. 11.03, eff. September 1, 2009.

I'm trying to follow this on my phone between meetings and haven't had a chance to sit down at my computer to do much research.

Your condescending response let's me know that you are NOT the type of instructor I'll seek out for my renewal.

Thank you for the response nonetheless.

Because I choose facts over conjecture... well it does not make for good internet conversations into the hypothetical. I guess I should have made some type of emotional response to this, that way I could please everyone.

[KaiserB]

What are the disqualifying mental illnesses and who determines who has those disqualifying illnesses? Does it matter to what degree someone must be ill with one of the illnesses to disqualify them from gun ownership?

These details need to be ironed out before an informed decision can be made about whether this is a good idea or not. We don't need another pass it so we can find out what is in it law.

That has ALREADY been defined. 30 seconds on Google will get you this:

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(7), a person is incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person:
(1) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition that causes or is likely to cause substantial impairment in judgment, mood, perception, impulse control, or intellectual ability;
(2) suffers from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subdivision (1) that:
(A) is in remission but is reasonably likely to redevelop at a future time; or
(B) requires continuous medical treatment to avoid redevelopment;
(3) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician, determined by a review board or similar authority, or declared by a court to be incompetent to manage the person's own affairs; or
(4) has entered in a criminal proceeding a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
(e) The following constitutes evidence that a person has a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d)(1):
(1) involuntary psychiatric hospitalization;
(2) psychiatric hospitalization;
(3) inpatient or residential substance abuse treatment in the preceding five-year period;
(4) diagnosis in the preceding five-year period by a licensed physician that the person is dependent on alcohol, a controlled substance, or a similar substance; or
(5) diagnosis at any time by a licensed physician that the person suffers or has suffered from a psychiatric disorder or condition consisting of or relating to:
(A) schizophrenia or delusional disorder;
(B) bipolar disorder;
(C) chronic dementia, whether caused by illness, brain defect, or brain injury;
(D) dissociative identity disorder;
(E) intermittent explosive disorder; or
(F) antisocial personality disorder.
(f) Notwithstanding Subsection (d), a person who has previously been diagnosed as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d) or listed in Subsection (e) is not because of that disorder or condition incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person provides the department with a certificate from a licensed physician whose primary practice is in the field of psychiatry stating that the psychiatric disorder or condition is in remission and is not reasonably likely to develop at a future time.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.
(h) The issuance of a license to carry a concealed handgun to a person eligible under Subsection (g) does not affect the person's ability to purchase a handgun or ammunition under federal law.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.03(a), 9.04(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 255, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 486, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146, Sec. 11.03, eff. September 1, 2009.

Uh, this is defined in Texas, NOT for Federal. The background check is Federal. You need to make sure you are quoting before you say it has ALREADY been defined.

And in the process of going through court what is the most likely first? Being Adjudicated in the Supreme Court or being adjudicated at a local court, then superior court, then state court, then Federal Court. Think about how the process works within the law.

I knew what I was quoting that is why I had the reference at the bottom.

[Keith B]

Uh, this is defined in Texas, NOT for Federal. The background check is Federal. You need to make sure you are quoting before you say it has ALREADY been defined.

And in the process of going through court what is the most likely first? Being Adjudicated in the Supreme Court or being adjudicated at a local court, then superior court, then state court, then Federal Court. Think about how the process works within the law.

I knew what I was quoting that is why I had the reference at the bottom.

It is still a state requirement and not federal. You have to remember who you are dealing with in terms of Texas vs. US and how conservative or liberal the individuals crafting, introducing and confirming the laws are. It will be a totally different view and ballgame at a federal level.

[anygunanywhere]

Feinstein: Veterans Have PTSD, Shouldn’t Own “Assault” Rifles

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/0 ... rn-rifles/

The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transfer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member or veteran and there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this.

[...]

I think we have to – if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally, don’t have access to this kind of weapon.

These are the same senators who will be voting on this other bill regarding mental health. The senate is socialist controlled.

Your expectations are that this will go exactly as legislated?

Think about who the judges are and who appointed them? They answer to no one.

Obamacare passed and no one knew what was in the legislation.

What is this fascination with the word "adjudicated"? The courts and attorneys general can define mental illness in whatever way they choose and find anyone they choose as mentally unfit for whatever reason they decide.

The veterans are going to be the first ones hit with this to keep them from arming and rising up when the hammer falls.

Anygunanywhere

[RoyGBiv]

^^^^^ "advent of PTSD???

Right... PTSD never happened before Iraq. Unbelievable.

[Keith B]

Feinstein: Veterans Have PTSD, Shouldn’t Own “Assault” Rifles

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/0 ... rn-rifles/

The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transfer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member or veteran and there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this.

[...]

I think we have to – if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally, don’t have access to this kind of weapon.

These are the same senators who will be voting on this other bill regarding mental health. The senate is socialist controlled.

Your expectations are that this will go exactly as legislated?

Think about who the judges are and who appointed them? They answer to no one.

Obamacare passed and no one knew what was in the legislation.

What is this fascination with the word "adjudicated"? The courts and attorneys general can define mental illness in whatever way they choose and find anyone they choose as mentally unfit for whatever reason they decide.

The veterans are going to be the first ones hit with this to keep them from arming and rising up when the hammer falls.

Anygunanywhere

No, this is the senator (singular) who thinks this way. Admittedly there are a few others on her boat, but overall this type or rhetoric will cause her discredit with her peers.

One of the things you need to think about is your level of fear. It seems you believe everyone is in cahoots and they are all out to take us down. While there are several in the anti-gun crowd in Washington than have been able to gain traction by sensationalizing the Newtown shootings, reasonable legislation can be implemented and the ludicrous over the top gun-grab bills can be blocked. To do this you must keep a level head and not get in a Chicken Little mode running around yelling 'The sky is falling'. Take off your tin hats, look logically at the pending legislation (which is a threat for sure), approach your representatives in a strong but business-like manner expressing your views and wants, and make sure your voice is heard as a level headed person and you are not perceived as some deranged gun-loving redneck

[Purplehood]

... and make sure your voice is heard as a level headed person and you are not perceived as some deranged gun-loving redneck

Darn, that ruined my whole plan of attack!

[mojo84]

What are the disqualifying mental illnesses and who determines who has those disqualifying illnesses? Does it matter to what degree someone must be ill with one of the illnesses to disqualify them from gun ownership?

These details need to be ironed out before an informed decision can be made about whether this is a good idea or not. We don't need another pass it so we can find out what is in it law.

That has ALREADY been defined. 30 seconds on Google will get you this:

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(7), a person is incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person:
(1) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition that causes or is likely to cause substantial impairment in judgment, mood, perception, impulse control, or intellectual ability;
(2) suffers from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subdivision (1) that:
(A) is in remission but is reasonably likely to redevelop at a future time; or
(B) requires continuous medical treatment to avoid redevelopment;
(3) has been diagnosed by a licensed physician, determined by a review board or similar authority, or declared by a court to be incompetent to manage the person's own affairs; or
(4) has entered in a criminal proceeding a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
(e) The following constitutes evidence that a person has a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d)(1):
(1) involuntary psychiatric hospitalization;
(2) psychiatric hospitalization;
(3) inpatient or residential substance abuse treatment in the preceding five-year period;
(4) diagnosis in the preceding five-year period by a licensed physician that the person is dependent on alcohol, a controlled substance, or a similar substance; or
(5) diagnosis at any time by a licensed physician that the person suffers or has suffered from a psychiatric disorder or condition consisting of or relating to:
(A) schizophrenia or delusional disorder;
(B) bipolar disorder;
(C) chronic dementia, whether caused by illness, brain defect, or brain injury;
(D) dissociative identity disorder;
(E) intermittent explosive disorder; or
(F) antisocial personality disorder.
(f) Notwithstanding Subsection (d), a person who has previously been diagnosed as suffering from a psychiatric disorder or condition described by Subsection (d) or listed in Subsection (e) is not because of that disorder or condition incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun if the person provides the department with a certificate from a licensed physician whose primary practice is in the field of psychiatry stating that the psychiatric disorder or condition is in remission and is not reasonably likely to develop at a future time.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.
(h) The issuance of a license to carry a concealed handgun to a person eligible under Subsection (g) does not affect the person's ability to purchase a handgun or ammunition under federal law.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.03(a), 9.04(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 255, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 486, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146, Sec. 11.03, eff. September 1, 2009.

I'm trying to follow this on my phone between meetings and haven't had a chance to sit down at my computer to do much research.

Your condescending response let's me know that you are NOT the type of instructor I'll seek out for my renewal.

Thank you for the response nonetheless.

Because I choose facts over conjecture... well it does not make for good internet conversations into the hypothetical. I guess I should have made some type of emotional response to this, that way I could please everyone.

I was the one looking for the actual language of the bill and definitions of the proposed federal legislation. You are the one that provided wrong information and then tried to justify it with "conjecture" and speculation.

My entire point is that if mental illness is used to deny someone the right to own a gun, the illnesses and the degree to which someone has those illnesses needs to be well stipulated and not open to subjective opinion of any one doctor or bureaucrat.

Since I found the actual language of the subject bill, I see defining the illnesses are not applicable to this particular bill.

[stevie_d_64]

I do not believe Senator Feinstien is alone in her assumptions about veterans, most progressives hiding their socialist tendencies implicitely distrust ALL people who have served this country, and as a veteran, I continue to stand insulted by their lack of virtue...

I oppose this bill, this idea that universal background checks is anything but yet another baby step in the wrong direction...As the results of any gun-control effort, regardless of its intent, will not work...period...

I do not often dissagree with the NRA and its positions on gun-control issues (I can't recall if I ever really have)...This one I definitely do...To assume this will stave off ANY future attempt at additional efforts to infringe upon us, to label (classify) those of us who do understand what the Second Amendment IS all about, is dangerous...

They have no intent to stop their ultimate goal, and to give them ANY political concession is dangerous...The Second Amendment is not about politics...My right to keep and bear arms is not a political issue to be triffled with, or some sort of emotional smite to those that do not wish to accept what that right is all about...

Most all know what the real meaning of the Second Amendment is, and if I am somehow pigeon-holed by anyone for, or against it, as being prepared for rebelling against a tyrannical government, then I feel I am in good company...And those that laugh off the possiblity of that "extreme circumstance" (a recent political theme these days) are fooling themselves...I do not look forward to that possibility, and I would rather the fight be taken up (and remain) in the courts and legislatures around this country, and NOT in the streets...Because if that ever happens, no one wins...

This is my opinion, and I stand by it and others that agree with me...I know I am not alone...

Regards...

[stevie_d_64]

On a side note...The way I used to deal with the stresses of military service and deployments (in the past)...

I knew I was home and could turn off the constant "check six" mentality for a while...

I went by myself, or anyone else who wanted to go, find a good restaurant that served tall...ice cold...glasses of milk...

And a chicken-fried steak!!!

Forever!!!

[Keith B]

... and make sure your voice is heard as a level headed person and you are not perceived as some deranged gun-loving redneck

Darn, that ruined my whole plan of attack!

Git 'er done!