http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/11/seattle-jewish-federation-to-lawmakers-close-the-gun-show-loophole Comments On: Seattle Jewish Federation to Lawmakers: Close the Gun Show Loophole by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Fri, 24 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
"Somehow, I think if you have enough history to show mental illness as a defense at your trial there really should be enough to prevent you from owning a firearm."

If you are given an involuntary stay at a mental institution, I think that should be sufficient grounds to lose your right to bear arms. Perhaps there should be some way to get your right back, but the current method is far too easy.

If mental health professionals had a way to report someone as being unfit to bear arms (yep, would require a national database of those mentally unfit - what? Too nazi-like for you? But! Keeping a national database of firearms owners is perfectly okay?) you could use that as well, with the same caveat as above.

The fact is that the majority of mass shooters had a history of mental illness. It isn't like serial killers where, afterwards, everyone is like, "He was the best neighbor ever, I had no idea he buried dozens of teenage boys in the crawlspace under his house." By and large, the response to mass shooters is, "No surprise, everyone was just waiting something like that to happen."
Posted by randoma]]> Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:05:49 -0800 The Stranger Posted by sarah70]]> Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:51:34 -0800 The Stranger Posted by evilvolus]]> Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:36:04 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Lew Siffer]]> Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:02:14 -0800 The Stranger
I agree with you, but c'mon. You're being snarky.
Posted by disintegrator]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:18:57 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Fnarf]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:37:17 -0800 The Stranger
As far as someone developing mental health issues after they own firearms, there are plenty of imperfect solutions, none great.
Posted by randoma]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:36:55 -0800 The Stranger
Why can't we? Why can't it be a felony to allow mentally ill relatives or minors access to firearms in the family home? It would only be enforceable after the fact, but it might be enough to compel "responsible" gun owners to actually be responsible for once.
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:16:55 -0800 The Stranger
That term is driving me fucking bananas. The "loophole" allows any asshole to sell guns without any kind of licensing for the seller or background check for the buyer. Loophole, my ass.
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:15:07 -0800 The Stranger
One victim in that shooting, who still has a bullet lodged near hr spine, says she opposes any new gun troll laws. She was interviewed on KOMO.

What say you?
Posted by Chicken shits]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:03:21 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Former Lurker]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:01:26 -0800 The Stranger Posted by evilvolus]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:58:44 -0800 The Stranger
What would prevent someone with no history of mental health issues buy guns and then develop mental health issues later?

Somewhere north of a quarter of the population of the US will have mental health problems at some point in their lifetime.
Posted by Fnarf]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:54:52 -0800 The Stranger
Maybe instead, of worrying solely about the "gunshow loophole", maybe we could worry about the fact that he had a 10 year history of mental health problems. Perhaps *better* background checks, allowing mental health issues to be linked to the NICS database (I know, terrible breach of privacy) and make it more difficult to "rehabilitate" your mental health ban on firearm ownership. I realize that the NRA doesn't like that because, well, it is against the "2nd Ammendment" or something, and liberals dislike that because it is prejudiced against people with mental illness, and invasion of mental health patients privacy or something.

Somehow, I think if you have enough history to show mental illness as a defense at your trial there really should be enough to prevent you from owning a firearm. This litmus test would probably have halved our 'mass shootings' in the last decade.
Posted by randoma]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:43:52 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Fnarf]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:34:46 -0800 The Stranger