Posted on 04/20/2007 7:12:33 AM PDT by presidio9
Let's not waste time debating whether NBC should have aired Cho Seung-hui's video dispatch from hell. More important is the fact that Cho was able, quite legally, to buy two guns despite his documented psychiatric history.
This is because Congress and the Commonwealth of Virginia, in their zeal to promote gun ownership, believe it permissible to peddle weapons to everyone but convicted felons and the most deranged of the mentally ill. Those who are merely suicidal, or might become homicidal if they skip their meds or therapy, are welcome to all the handguns and ammo they like.
By whom we mean people like Cho. Per federal law, Virginia gun shops do on-the-spot criminal and psychiatric background checks on would-be buyers. But the mental history inquiries raise a flag only if the customer has been judged mentally defective or involuntarily committed. And Cho never made that grade - not quite.
But he was close. An acquaintance who feared Cho was suicidal called police, and cops were concerned enough that they brought him before a judge - who likewise sensed something amiss and ordered him psychiatrically evaluated. "Presents an imminent danger to himself," the judge found. But a doctor prescribed outpatient treatment instead of committing him. And that's what let this maniac arm himself.
Plainly, anyone who has been diagnosed as potentially suicidal, or forced by court order into treatment or evaluation, should not be able to buy semiautomatics. The risks are simply too great.
So too, it turned out, was the risk of accommodating a person such as Cho on Virginia Tech's campus. More than a few responsible people there knew he was "disturbed." But then, offers the VT administration, you can't kick a student out just because he's creepy and visibly nuts. Even a crazy man is entitled to a college education.
But, for God's sake, here was a man whose behavior posed a clear and present threat. A man who stalked women and set fires. Who so alarmed fellow students that they stopped coming to class. Who made one teacher so nervous she yanked him out of class and tutored him privately - with a special signal to bring help if she needed it. A student who indeed was formally ordered by a court into a mental evaluation.
At what point, pray, does a college deem itself entitled to tell such a person: "We do not want you here. Go"? That time was long past at Virginia Tech - just as it is long past time, even by the standards of the gun-happy Commonwealth of Virginia, which is to say essentially no standards at all, to recognize that this creature should not be sold a 9-mm. Glock.
There are many Cho Seung-huis among us. That is the unpleasant fact. Already across the land this Columbine anniversary week, there arise threats of copycat school mayhem. Some people are just crazy, that's all. We've got to at least halfway try to keep guns out of their crazy hands.
LOL. I thought the freeper conventional wisdom that it was people who killed people.
Guns don’t and they are inanimate objects, so how could abstractions like “nutty gun laws” kill people?
The gun laws didn’t cause this; the laws that allow wackos like this guy to roam freely caused it.
More stupidity and unintended circumstance from the left. You reap what you sew. But I'm sure it's Bush's fault.
circumstance = consequence
DOH!
The fact is, there was a law that helped this tragedy along, and that was the rule that no one could carry concealed weapons on the campus, if one armed student had been around, or if the campus police would have been armed this whole tragedy might have been averted, and almost certainly would have ended with far fewer deaths, to proclaim and area a gun free zone is simply signing people's death warrents in advance.
Under the current model, once someone is committed to an institution by the courts, it becomes a matter of public record and can be picked up by the NICS system making them ineligible. How much further do we want to push the line?
No matter where the line is put, someone somewhere will be close to it, but not over, and probably still be dangerous. So how exaclty do we solve this with more laws?
This shooter lied on his application to buy the weapon regarding psychiatric treatment. Law of course could be circumvented by the criminal, but, the law did address it.
The judge who did not commit the shooter erred in not doing so. The law allowed for it, but the enforcement was lax. Not the law's fault.
The policy manual in VT probably has dozens of things in it about how stalking, etc., makes expulsion an option... again, lax enforcement. Not a problem with lack of policy. It was lack of enforcement.
The shooter had acted in a threatening manner to other students, and had even set fire to his room.
Again, the rules and the law support expulsion for his transgressions.
The whole thing was the shooter's doing, BUT lack of enforcement of previously existing, reasonable laws, would have made this episode much less likely.
The kid would have been expelled, gone home, and been working in the dry cleaning store under the supervision of parents.
The shooter, abetted by PC, liberal culture, and HIPPA, and LACK OF ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING LAWS AND RULES killed those 32 people.
And that is why you need to do away with , "Gun Free Zones."
There is no such thing.
This trope has it all wrong, bass ackwards.
The NY Daily News obviously knows nothing of American history, the right of self defense and the 2nd amendment.
The guy is right...BUT, it was the NUTTY gun law at VT (Gun Free Zone)...had there been a few can carrying students in that class, the SOB would have been dead LONG before he could kill so many.
I wonder where are the calls to have this doctor's license suspended, and where are the civil lawsuits against him for mis-diagnosing such an "imminent danger."
Where are the calls to provide exceptions to the HIPAA laws that prevents such medical information from being shared with the FBI NICS database.
No, let's just ban all guns and we'll be as safe as Washington, DC.
These are court records that pertain to fed law disqualifiers. Fed law is stricter than VA law on the matter. The State of VA does not volunteer them to the NCIS database as requested.
Actually the gun laws of Virginia did cause it. Public universities are specifically allowed to ban concealed weapons permit holders from carrying concealed weapons. A bill correcting this problem was barely defeated a year ago. The president of VT was very happy that the ban on concealed weapons on campus would continue.
What was the “outpatient treatment?” I am wondering if PROZAC was involved. That was the ‘drug of choice’ for all of those postal workers that shot up postal centers ten years ago.
Bogus restraining orders are only temporary and have no permanent effect.
"yet won't share mental health information with the FBI's NICS."
It's not really health info. These are court findings, that almost always are triggered by some criminal complaint.
“Actually the gun laws of Virginia did cause it. Public universities are specifically allowed to ban concealed weapons permit holders from carrying concealed weapons. A bill correcting this problem was barely defeated a year ago. The president of VT was very happy that the ban on concealed weapons on campus would continue.”
The victims families should bring suit against all parties responsible for banning guns.
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.