Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rules should have barred weapon purchase
Associated Press ^ | 4-19-07 | By MATTHEW BARAKAT, Associated Press Writer

Posted on 04/19/2007 7:32:47 PM PDT by RWB Patriot

McLEAN, Va. - A judge's ruling on Cho Seung-Hui's mental health should have barred him from purchasing the handguns he used in the Virginia Tech massacre, according to federal regulations. But it was unclear Thursday whether anybody had an obligation to inform federal authorities about Cho's mental status because of loopholes in the law that governs background checks.

Cho purchased two handguns in February and March, and was subject to federal and state background checks both times. The checks turned up no problems, despite a judge's ruling in December 2005 that Cho "presents an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness."

"On the face of it, he should have been blocked under federal law," said Denis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

The 23-year-old South Korean immigrant was evaluated by a psychiatric hospital after he was accused of stalking two women and photographing female students in class with his cell phone. His violence-filled writings were so disturbing that professors begged him to get counseling.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: backgroundchecks; cho; guncontrol; vatech
Here we go. "Our gun laws aren't working, so let's make them even more restrictive 'cause we're too dumb to realize that rules and laws rarely stop killers and criminals"
1 posted on 04/19/2007 7:32:49 PM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

Here’s the infamous “loophole” noun that gets thrown around carelessly. It’s every antis favorite buzzword to stoke up the fire.


2 posted on 04/19/2007 7:35:17 PM PDT by joseph20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot
When people have a seizure, the Doc has to tell the DMV.

Seems a simply change can fix this.

3 posted on 04/19/2007 7:36:03 PM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

Makes one wonder, what would a politician or a reporter do if they were not allowed to ‘word-smith’ every story or issue?

Or, what would lawyers do for that matter???

This one is going to go well past Nov. 08 for sure.


4 posted on 04/19/2007 7:38:25 PM PDT by elpinta (Tagline temporarily out of service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

If he’d been disqualified from buying the guns, he’d have gotten guns illegally anyway. This was planned and wasn’t a spur of the moment crime of passion.


5 posted on 04/19/2007 7:39:15 PM PDT by umgud ("When seconds count, the police are just 10 minutes away!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot
The reports I heard was that ultimately the judge did not make a final ruling that he was a danger to himself or others, and that made him legally able to purchase a firearm.
6 posted on 04/19/2007 7:39:15 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

OR, “so essentially, the government screwed up, but your answer is to invoke more government so they can screw up more?”


7 posted on 04/19/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1L

Well, yes, that is what they DO!


8 posted on 04/19/2007 7:42:20 PM PDT by elpinta (Tagline temporarily out of service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

If the judge declared him mentally defective, why was he allowed to go back to school?


9 posted on 04/19/2007 7:46:09 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Encourage illegal immigration! Maybe you too can be hit and killed by a drunk driver!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

A determination to defend yourself and the tool and training to do it with is the only deterrent to criminals and murderers. All the government ever does is make more laws that only bind the law-abiding.


10 posted on 04/19/2007 7:48:04 PM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

-—”On the face of it, he should have been blocked under federal law,” said Denis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.-—

On the face of it, no one should believe a word this guy says.


11 posted on 04/19/2007 7:48:09 PM PDT by claudiustg (I curse you, Rudy of the Giuliani!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elpinta

A scene from Tremors 3 Back To Perfection comes to mind:

G-men: “What do we do?”

Burt Gummer (Michael Gross): “You do what you do best: find something simple and complicate it!”


12 posted on 04/19/2007 7:53:46 PM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

To even discuss this is garbage. This guy was going to kill people, some how, some way.

If it wasn’t a gun it would have been with car or a knife or a sword or a bomb, or with gasoline or something. He was going to do it with something and to go on about it being a gun is unless.


13 posted on 04/19/2007 7:55:04 PM PDT by BFM (CLINTON is and always will be a rapist. Never forget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BFM

“To even discuss this is garbage. This guy was going to kill people, some how, some way.

If it wasn’t a gun it would have been with car or a knife or a sword or a bomb, or with gasoline or something. He was going to do it with something and to go on about it being a gun is unless.”

We all know why the Brady Center is making an issue out of how he got the guns; because they want to use this tragedy to further their anti-gun agenda.


14 posted on 04/19/2007 7:59:10 PM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

Thanks Patriot, that concludes my last good laugh for the day!
Would be funnier if it wasn’t true though...


15 posted on 04/19/2007 8:04:11 PM PDT by elpinta (Tagline temporarily out of service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

Why didn’t the courts ruling subject him to deportation? He wasn’t a naturalized citizen, he was a resident alien.


16 posted on 04/19/2007 8:11:40 PM PDT by Figment ("A communist is someone who reads Marx.An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx" R Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

There’s a post elsewhere saying VT has rules that make it about impossible to expel anyone (except for not paying your bills I’m sure).


17 posted on 04/19/2007 8:12:33 PM PDT by 1066AD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Figment

They’re hardly able to export the illegal ones, so it’s no surprise they can’t do it with the legal ones.


18 posted on 04/19/2007 8:25:09 PM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot
McLEAN, Va. - A judge's ruling on Cho Seung-Hui's mental health should have barred him from purchasing the handguns he used in the Virginia Tech massacre, according to federal regulations. But it was unclear Thursday whether anybody had an obligation to inform federal authorities about Cho's mental status because of loopholes in the law that governs background checks...judge was on Fox tonight - he said that he required Cho to get outpatient treatment because Cho said he would cooperate - since the treatment was to be outpatient rather than inpatient committed status, it was never reported to the central registry which was consulted when he bought his guns - it was apparently the laws requiring what was and wasn't reported which allowed Cho to purchase his weapons without being flagged.......
19 posted on 04/19/2007 9:13:09 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

Then he would have found a way to get them illegally.

This was a psychopath, not a law-abiding misunderstood victim of society.


20 posted on 04/19/2007 9:20:03 PM PDT by SandyInSeattle (What's with nearly eighty degrees in April? Am I in Seattle, or Los Angeles?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Intolerant in NJ

Was there any followup to insure that he actually was following the outpatient program?


21 posted on 04/20/2007 5:00:25 PM PDT by Stayfree (*******************Harry Reid exposed at CapitolHillComedy.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot
"The First Amendment gives us journalist the right to say anything we want, and you CAN'T STOP us! It is the First Amendment dammit! And that Second Amendment doesn't mean dog squat!"


22 posted on 04/20/2007 5:03:35 PM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
"The reports I heard was that ultimately the judge did not make a final ruling that he was a danger to himself or others,..."

Then judge made the ruling after the doc's evaluation. It was the official ruling, and you only need one ruling.

23 posted on 04/20/2007 5:10:38 PM PDT by spunkets ("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot
""Our gun laws aren't working, so let's make them even more restrictive 'cause we're too dumb to realize that rules and laws rarely stop killers and criminals""

The VA court's determination did disqualify Cho from purchasing any firearms according to fed law, 18USC922(g)(4). The court record was never entered into the NICS dbase, because VA declined to volunteer those court records to the DOJ. 28CFR25.4 says the States may volunteer info regarding the fed disqualifications contained in 18USC922. SInce VA didn't forward the court finding, Cho's fed BG check came out clean.

In 2002, the House passed a bill saying the States must forward such info, and put up some $s for it. The Senate never moved on it. Had it became law, the info would have been in the NICS dbase and Cho's BG check would have said decline.

24 posted on 04/20/2007 5:19:18 PM PDT by spunkets ("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

The judge DID rule at one point that he was a danger to himself or others. But later, he changed the ruling, otherwise Cho would have entered into the system and have been unable to purchase a weapon. That is the best I can recall from what I have heard.


25 posted on 04/20/2007 5:23:00 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

This is Bill Clinton’s fault. HIPPA regulations were passed under his watch in 1995.


26 posted on 04/20/2007 5:26:59 PM PDT by LetsRok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
He was adjudicated by the judge as being mentally ill.

I support the right of all law-abiding citizens to bear arms. I do NOT support the right of the mentally ill to bear arms.

The law that forbids the sale of guns to the mentally ill is a good law. It gives voice to responsible gun ownership as a fundamental right.

Bottom line: yeah, he might have found some other way to kill 32 people, but maybe not. He should certainly not have been able to buy a gun to do it.

Nobody should be defending this guy's right to buy a gun because he had no more such right than a 5 year old.

27 posted on 04/20/2007 6:36:04 PM PDT by King of Florida (A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: King of Florida

I am still only saying that what I had heard was that he WAS legally adjudicated as mentally ill, but it was either changed or set aside at some later point in time. If you have the final document I would really like a link to it rather than the continuous back and forth.


28 posted on 04/20/2007 6:45:02 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
"But later, he changed the ruling, otherwise Cho would have entered into the system and have been unable to purchase a weapon"

The ruling was never changed. It stands. No subsequent ruling in that process could have changed it. The fact that he was never committed is relevant to VA firearms law only, not fed law. Fed law says the disqualifierss are: found a danger due to mental defect, OR committed. VA law just says committed is a disqualifier.

29 posted on 04/20/2007 6:53:35 PM PDT by spunkets ("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares

But the patient doesn’t necessarily have to tell the doctor.


30 posted on 04/20/2007 6:55:15 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Life isn't fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all.--William Goldman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

I have a question about all of this mess:

If the Second amendment says that the “right to keep and bear arm shall not be abridged”

Well the state of VA is a conceal carry state if I am not mistaken. A governmental entity-a state univeristy-passed a no guns policy for state property-the grounds of VT university. Wasn’t the state of VA abridging the rights of citizes to keep and bear arms? Perhaps had the student’s right to carry had not been abridged they may have been able to save themselves.


31 posted on 04/20/2007 7:03:20 PM PDT by mrmargaritaville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

Link to the document or explain why he wasn’t in the system.


32 posted on 04/20/2007 7:07:00 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
28CFR25.4

Sec. 25.4 Record source categories.

It is anticipated that most records in the NICS Index will be obtained from Federal agencies. It is also anticipated that a limited number of authorized state and local law enforcement agencies will voluntarily contribute records to the NICS Index. Information in the NCIC and III systems that will be searched during a background check has been or will be contributed voluntarily by Federal, state, local, and international criminal justice agencies.

33 posted on 04/20/2007 7:10:56 PM PDT by spunkets ("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
I've not heard about any later action. All I have read is that some time in late 2005 a judge declared him mentally ill and an imminent danger to himself. This was enough to bring him under the federal law.

I can't believe that anything subsequent to this would have made it OK for him to purchase a firearm. I mean, the guy was a nut, and was adjudicated as much in late 2005. There could not have been any time in the last year and a half where someone would have said, well, you're not really that nuts, so we'll let you buy a gun.

In other words, once you've been adjudicated mentally ill and you're within that federal law, the burden should be on you to show that, no, that law no longer applies to me because I am completely cured or the initial adjudication was erroneous.

That initial adjudication was spot on. Maybe one could trot out some hypothetical of a guy who was unjustly adjudicated mentally ill and was denied the right to buy a gun, and then somebody broke into his house and killed his family but he was unable to defend them or himself because he had unjustly been declared mentally ill and denied the right to buy a gun.

But better that then having the Seung Hui Chos of the world packing.

We always say that we don't need any more gun control laws, we just need to enforce the laws that are already on the books. This is an instance where Virginia blew it by not complying with a federal law already on the books.

34 posted on 04/20/2007 7:12:08 PM PDT by King of Florida (A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mrmargaritaville
Perhaps had the student’s right to carry had not been abridged they may have been able to save themselves.

Amen.

The greatest travesty of law was the set of laws that disarmed practically everyone else but the shooter on that campus.

35 posted on 04/20/2007 7:16:45 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: King of Florida; spunkets

Both of your answers are correct and I am not in disagreement. Why was he NOT entered in the system if he was required to be entered? I mean the obvious defense of a mentally ill person is to assert that he didn’t know he couldn’t buy a gun because he didn’t know any better because of mental illness.


36 posted on 04/20/2007 7:21:14 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
"Why was he NOT entered in the system if he was required to be entered?"

See the link to 28CFR25.4 i gave in #33 that covers that. A States submission of data that diqualifies firearms purchases under fed law, is voluntary. The chief LEO of the buyers local within the State of residence, of the chief LEO for the whole State, is responsible for the BG check regarding State law only. VA law is less strict with regard to this matter.

37 posted on 04/20/2007 7:26:18 PM PDT by spunkets ("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree
Was there any followup to insure that he actually was following the outpatient program?...The judge didn't say, but I think I heard elsewhere that Cho hadn't attended many, if any at all, treatment sessions - and as usual, there was apparently little or no followup by the program, probably because he was going there "voluntarily"......
38 posted on 04/20/2007 8:58:11 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife

“But the patient doesn’t necessarily have to tell the doctor.”

Oh sure. But someone clearly nuts ought to stand out. Like this guy did.


39 posted on 04/20/2007 10:13:33 PM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RWB Patriot

BATF - the Armed Forces of the Gun Control lobby!


40 posted on 04/21/2007 4:53:28 AM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson