Toomey and Manchin’s Flawed Background Check

April 11, 2013 at 7:51 AM

The real answer to gun problems in the United States lies in doing something about those who use guns to commit crimes.  No amount of background checking is going to solve that problem since most criminals obtain their weapons illegally.  According to Sen. Ted Cruz, only 1.4% of gun-related crime is connected with guns that come from gun shows. [1]

As far as the Toomey/Manchin background check amendment, there appears to be a serious flaw in it.  “The proposal will allow a doctor to add a patient to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) without ever telling the patient he or she has been added. There would be no due process requirement.” [2]

Does that make you nervous?  If not, you are probably a Leftist.  Here is one Leftist’s response to this bill:  “This is a great bill. We’ve seen what happens when mentally ill people are allowed to purchase guns. In Colorado, the patient’s doctor warned the police weeks in advance that he might do something violent, but they didn’t do anything. If the people who know best–the mental health professionals–were allowed to use their expertise, we would have less murders by crazy people–no Arizona murder and no Aurora murder, perhaps.” [3; emphasis added]

Essentially, this individual is in favor of taking away people’s rights because some mental health agency says the person may be a danger to himself or others.  So, because a person might do something, it is fine (and probably necessary) to violate that person’s rights?

A gun owner had his guns illegally confiscated recently in Gov. Cuomo’s state of New York.  Why?  Because at one time, for a short period of time, he was prescribed medication by a healthcare provider.  The man’s lawyer is trying to determine how that information got into the hands of government agencies.  It was a violation of his privacy rights.  Yet, under the NY SAFE ACT, this type of thing could easily become the norm.

Leftists like Piers Morgan constantly throw numbers around that are conflated to serve their cause.  We don’t hear them talking about Mexico where the only people who have guns are police and criminals and there were 60,000 deaths last year there.

At a recently held rally in Austin, TX, City Council member Mike Martinez was quoted as saying, “First of all, to the gentleman who is dying for attention, someone needs to inform him that there is no gun ban currently, but because of the work we’re doing here today, we will make your sign legitimate shortly, so you hang on to that.” [4]

Obviously, the first part of his quote is clear.  The problem is with the last part “but because of the work we’re doing here today, we will make your sign legitimate shortly, so you hang on to that.”  I’m not really sure what Mr. Martinez means by it.  In order to be fair to him, I’m trying to get him to clarify it so I’ve put in a call to his office and hope to hear from him soon. Hopefully, we’ll hear from him soon and can then update our information.

There is nothing wrong with doing a background check on a person to see whether or not there is criminal behavior in a person’s history.  However, a universal background check that attempts to determine whether a person might do something in the future is just plain demagoguery and puts the process in the hands of one person; in this case, a mental health professional.

How many criminals take the time to see a mental healthcare provider?  What if the doctor makes a misdiagnosis?  What happens if a person is wrongly diagnosed?  What happens to a person once they are “in” the system?  What a nightmare that could become.

There are too many flaws in this bill for it to become law.  The biggest of course, is that too many assume that a background check is going to solve problems like the Sandy Hook tragedy before they occur.

Adam Lanza killed his mother, then used her guns to murder others.  He was not old enough to have a handgun.  The laws that were in place against murder, theft, unauthorized possession of a handgun, and more murder did not stop Lanza.

This bill does nothing but create a very slippery slope.  It is nothing more than a knee-jerk, emotional reaction to a terrible tragedy that will not prevent such tragedies in the future.

There is simply no law that will protect people from crazy people.  Too many on the Left unfortunately believe that restricting people’s rights through more government regulation is the way to address these issues, when in reality, it stems from the condition of man’s soul.  That is something that is well beyond the ability of government to regulate and always will be.

Common sense laws are fine.  Government overreach is not, unless of course, you’re a Leftist.

 

[1] http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/foghorn/the-truth-about-the-gun-show-loophole/

[2] http://www.therightscoop.com/erick-erickson-toomeys-background-check-amendment-has-a-serious-flaw/?hubRefSrc=email#lf_comment=68391245

[3] Ibid

[4] http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/pro-gun-advocates-attack-austin-texas-city-council-member-mike-martinez-video

Entry filed under: Gun Control, Political Correctness, Politically Correct, Politics. Tags: , .

Background Checks? Black on White Crime is Essentially Non-Existent


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,213 other followers

Donate to Study-Grow-Know 501 (3)(c) Non-Profit)

Study-Grow-Know Archives

Blog Stats

  • 723,874 hits

%d bloggers like this: