10
10
0
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 9
We have felons who are purchasing guns because law enforcement refuses to update the system and/or share information with other states.
(6)
(0)
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
LTC (Join to see) - I sort of agree with the HIPPA restriction though. Military in particular are statistically more likely to be listed as "mentally unstable" by medical providers (especially VA) and be refused the legal purchase of firearms. It goes like this: Provider: "Have you ever thought about harming someone?" You: "Well, one time when I was in Kindergarten...." Provider: Stamps *Violent Tendencies and at risk of harming others* in your file and mandatory reports to FBI database. It happens. It also took me nearly a year to get that expunged from my information to be able to purchase a firearm again. It also nearly cost me my EMS license and took away my ability to earn a paycheck. It's also yet another reason I don't use the VA for healthcare.
I'm not opposed to the concept but there needs to be better criteria for what threshold is used for reporting.
I'm not opposed to the concept but there needs to be better criteria for what threshold is used for reporting.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P MSgT, I agree. I have one issue with HIPPA and the Privacy Act. I think Commanders that are allowed to know their Soldier’s medical issues ought to be allowed to inform spouses of their service members condition and or the medical community should have that responsibility. We had numerous individuals that were on four or more psychotropic prescription medication that had no business having a firearm. I personally went to two of our spouses homes and ask them to remove firearms from their homes. I fully believe in 2A but I also realize when someone has lost their mental faculties due to the medications they are on. Our unit had three suicides in a 26 month period after a deployment. They were all preventable if we had the information from the medical community.
(1)
(0)
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
LTC (Join to see) - Agreed sir. I believe in situations such as you've illustrated here, Commanders SHOULD be informed. The challenge becomes where do we draw the line? Unfortunately, I don't have a good answer for that one.
(0)
(0)
The problem as stated in the article is people not the guns themselves. But in this era of not judging folks, we don’t hold folks accountable for their actions. We are not allowed to “profile” folks even though profiling has proven to be very effective. Nearly all those mass shooters fit the same profile. If we addressed the problems those folks were having, some of those shootings may have been prevented.
The other issue is that the government creates these laws, but doesn’t create the staffing to actually enforce them. When you create a data base, but don’t create the folks to actually complete the data base, the system will fail. States have told law enforcement to add all these folks into one system or another. All that takes time. The systems are all labor intensive. Who will do the input? The govt never provides the resources to do actually enforce the laws they create.
It’s not a surprise that so many folks slip through the system.
The other issue is that the government creates these laws, but doesn’t create the staffing to actually enforce them. When you create a data base, but don’t create the folks to actually complete the data base, the system will fail. States have told law enforcement to add all these folks into one system or another. All that takes time. The systems are all labor intensive. Who will do the input? The govt never provides the resources to do actually enforce the laws they create.
It’s not a surprise that so many folks slip through the system.
(5)
(0)
Read this with my inferred intent.
"The background system works, the human systems running it do not"
"The background system works, the human systems running it do not"
(5)
(0)
Read This Next