Why HR2640 is the symptom, but the involuntary commitment procedures are the DISEASE!

[Green Lantern]

From GOA, who don't quite share MY take on it:

Pennsylvania Case Reveals How McCarthy Bill Could Threaten All Gun
Owners
-- Troubling questions in HR 2640 still go unanswered

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

"For the first time [in history, HR 2640], if enacted, would
statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans." --
Military Order of the Purple Heart, June 18, 2007

ACTION:

1. Even if you have already sent an e-mail to your Senators on the
McCarthy bill, please send another such as the one at the end of this
alert. Yes, you might have already taken action on HR 2640. But if
you (and many other gun owners like yourself) haven't taken any
action recently, then NO ONE is taking action. After all, the NRA is
supporting this bill, so they're not rustlin' up the troops in
opposition to this massive gun control bill. Remember the
immigration fight -- it took weeks of continued activism to kill that
bill. This fight may very well be the same.

2. Please try to get as many of your friends as you can to join with
you in this effort to kill the McCarthy bill (HR 2640). Now that
Senators are returning from their July 4th holiday, we need to get as
many gun owners as possible to remind them that HR 2640 is
unacceptable!


McCARTHY BILL COULD COME UP AT ANY TIME IN THE U.S. SENATE

Now that Congress returns to work this week, your liberties are in
jeopardy once again!

You will remember that before the Independence Day break, the House
of Representatives passed a McCarthy gun control bill (HR 2640)
without any hearings, without any committee action... they put it on
the Suspension Calendar and simply got a non-recorded voice vote.

An important part of the legislative process is to introduce a bill
in committee, to get both public and private observers to ask
questions, make recommendations and offer comments on the bill.

But for some reason, HR 2640 was not given this benefit. The bill
was rammed through the legislature with very few Representatives
present on the House floor... there was no recorded vote at all!

So it's not surprising that, having skipped much of the legislative
process, there are still a lot of unanswered questions regarding HR
2640. In fact, these questions have only been magnified after an
offhanded, tongue-in-cheek remark made at the Harrisburg Community
College in Pennsylvania cost a man his gun rights for life in that
state.

Newspapers last month reported that Horatio Miller allegedly said
that it could be "worse than Virginia Tech" if someone broke
into his
car, because there were guns there. It is not clear whether he was
making a threat against a person who might burglarize his car, or if
he was simply saying that the bad guy could do a lot of damage
because of the guns he would find there. Nevertheless, Miller was
arrested, but not charged with anything.

The comment Miller made was certainly not the smartest thing to say.
But realize, we don't incarcerate people for making stupid statements
in this country -- at least not yet. Miller was a concealed carry
permit holder who, as such, had passed vigorous background checks
into his past history. Miller does not have a criminal record.

Regardless, the county district attorney did not like what he had
said, so, according to the Harrisburg Patriot News on June 20, "I
contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked.
And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental
health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to
possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily."

Get that?

Pennsylvania is operating exactly the way Rep. McCarthy's bill (HR
2640) could treat all Americans. You might be thinking, I've never
had a mental illness... I'm not a military veteran... I've never been
on Ritalin... hey, I have nothing to worry about under the McCarthy
bill. Right?

Well, think again.


DO YOUR VIEWS ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT MAKE YOU A POTENTIAL DANGER?

The Pennsylvania case shows how all gun owners could be threatened by
HR 2640. After all, did you ever tell anyone that the Second
Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because the Founders
(such as James Madison) wanted the people to be able to overturn a
tyrannical American government?

Or, while you were watching the nightly news -- and getting a
detailed account of all the crime in your area -- did you ever make a
statement such as, "If someone were to break through my door, I'd
blow him away!"

Well, those kinds of statements will certainly make anti-gun nuts
think you're a potential danger to yourself or others. So if you
make the local district attorney or police officer nervous, how
difficult would it be for him to get a psychiatrist (most of whom are
very left-wing) to say that you are a danger to yourself and to
others?

Or, would the district attorney even need to get a psychiatrist? One
of the outrageous aspects of the McCarthy bill is that Section 3(2)
codifies existing federal regulations. And existing federal code says it only takes a "lawful authority" to "adjudicate" someone as a
mental defective.(1) And another section of the bill makes it clear
this "adjudication" does not need to be made by a formal court, but
can simply be a "determination" -- such as a medical diagnosis.(2)

Consider how significant this is. The BATFE has been quietly
attempting to amend the federal code by regulatory fiat for years,
but they've been somewhat restrained in their ability to interpret
these regulations because they are, after all, regulations (and not
statutory law).

But with HR 2640, much of the pablum that BATFE bureaucrats have
quietly added to the code over the years will now become the LAW OF
THE LAND -- even though those regs were never submitted to a
legislative committee or scrutinized in legislative hearings or
debated on the floor of the House of Representatives.

When one looks at the federal regs cited above, there are a lot of
questions that still remain unanswered. What kinds of people can
fall into this category of "other lawful authority" that can deem
someone to be a mental defective? Certainly, it would seem to apply
to Veterans Administration shrinks. After all, the federal
government already added more than 80,000 veterans with Post
Traumatic Stress into the NICS system in 2000.

But who else could be classified as a "lawful authority"? A school
counselor? A district attorney? What about a legislator, a city
councilman or a cop? They are certainly "authorities" in their own
right. Could the words "lawful authority" also apply to them?

Do we really want to risk the Second Amendment on the question of
what the words "lawful authority" in 27 CFR 478.11 mean --
once they
have been "statutized" by HR 2640 and BATF is no longer under ANY
constraint and can read it as broadly as they want?

If the "lawful authority" thinks you pose a danger to yourself or
others (or can't manage your own affairs) then your gun rights could
be gone.

In its open letter of May 9, 2007, BATFE makes it clear that this
"danger" doesn't have to be "imminent" or
"substantial," but can
include "any danger" at all. How many shrinks -- using the
Pennsylvania standard -- are going to say that a pro-gun American
like you, who believes the Second Amendment is the last defense
against tyranny, DOESN'T POSE AT LEAST AN INFINITESIMAL RISK of
hurting someone else?

As easy as that, your gun rights would be gone forever.

HR 2640 is Janet Reno's dream. Does somebody make a politician
nervous? Get a prescription pad, get your friendly left-wing
psychiatrist to make the "dangerous" diagnosis, and it's all over.
Expungement will be virtually impossible. Just turn in your guns.

FOOTNOTES:

(1) See 27 CFR 478.11.
(2) See Section 101(c)(1)(C).


FOR MORE INFORMATION: Supporters of the McCarthy bill are hanging
their hat on language which purports to help disqualified people to
get their rights restored. So GOA has built a special section on its
website that gets to the truth on this issue and informs gun owners
of the dangers in HR 2640. Please go to
http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm to learn what the specifics of the
bill are, who its main supporters are, answers to claims made by
proponents of the bill, who faces the greatest risk of being
disqualified for buying a gun, and more.

CONTACT INFORMATION: You can use the pre-written letter below to
help direct your comments to your two U.S. Senators. Please visit
the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

The Military Order of the Purple Heart got it right when it stated
that for the first time in history, HR 2640 "would statutorily impose
a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."

The Military Order of the Purple Heart, which is chartered by
Congress, is urging the DEFEAT of HR 2640, the Brady-expansion
legislation introduced by anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy.

Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this bill THREATENS gun
owners' rights and represents one of the biggest gun bans in history.


A recent case in Pennsylvania shows how easily a gun owner can be
slapped with a LIFETIME gun ban, without any due process, based
solely on a mere accusation by a shrink or other "lawful
authority."
For more information on this -- and for a point-by-point analysis of
HR 2640 -- please go to http://www.gunowners.org on the website of
Gun Owners of America.

All the background checks in the world will NOT stop bad guys from
getting firearms. Severe restrictions in Washington, DC, England,
Canada, Germany and other places have not stopped evil people from
using guns to commit murder.

Again, I hope you will OPPOSE the McCarthy bill (HR 2640). Thank
you.

Sincerely,


****************************

Now, 2640 is NOT law at this time. So, to me it looks like the REAL problem is some slap-happy DA being able to strip a man of his freedoms with one word to the cops!

Either Miller's rights were violated, or we have a MUCH bigger problem! Cause it looks to me like even if 2640 goes away, then what happened to Miller could happen to any or ALL of us!

[Beatnik]

Well, it's already happening, so it obviously doesn't make sense to fight it.

[BigRobT]

I'm kind of wondering IF the NRA or GOA has taken up the case of Horatio Miller?? Seems to me that some overreaching was done and people abusing their "positional authority". It fails me that a person could make a stupid statement and then get their rights revoked without due process. I think the DA in this case is blatantly wrong and unless he is an MD or other competent medical authority, has no grounds to do what he did. This almost seems like not only an attack on the Second Amendment, but also the First. Say something "wrong" and lose your rights!!

[Glockman17366]

I followed this case in a local gun rights forum (www.pfoa.org, for those interested) and contacted Fran Chardo, the Assistant DA the GOA is commenting about.

Although I do not know all the circumstances of the case, but apparently Mr. Miller made statements that were, at best, unwise. Also, per the ADA (and the newspaper this story was first printed in), LE had been called to this gentleman's home 22 times (but they didn't specify why the cops were called).

If Mr. Miller was 302'd in error or for a political reason, he'll have a heck of a lawsuit against the Community College, the Lebanon County (PA) DA's office, the shrink involved and local police force. I do know he was held after the initial evaluation period.

I'm not saying the GOA is wrong, but I do know the GOA goes off half cocked on occasion.

PA has a lot of gun rights avocates. The government knows we are scrutinizing their every move.

This case fell off the radar screen in a couple of days (old news is news not reported), so I don't know what's going on now, but I will post if it arises again.

However, the GOA is correct in that HR 2640 needs more work before submission to Bush.

[obxned]

"the county district attorney did not like what he had said, so, according to the Harrisburg Patriot News on June 20, "I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked. And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily."

Either:

A. The county attorney has the education and qualifications to practice psychiatry, and spent sufficient time with Miller to make such a diagnosis.

B. The county will get their butts sued, there will be an 'undisclosed' settlement, and the tax payers get screwed again!

C. The entire Bill of Rights is now nothing but Charmin.

Time will tell, but the answer is probably "C".

[Green Lantern]

Well, it's already happening, so it obviously doesn't make sense to fight it.

"Wassup wit dat?"

I'm not exactly "not fighting" 2640, but I'm a little more concerned about how the status quo WITHOUT it is still ripe for due process violations. FWIW, I sent the email linked to in the GOA alert, but I also added in my concerns about the current system of being committed as well.

[madmike]

Tag to watch.

[pcosmar]

It could be an example of the reasonableness of restrictions.

[Golden Saber]

The original news article was also printed here.

My question continues to be, what is going on within GOA that they keep going further and further out on the limb they're on?

***********************************************

Man took weapons to campus, police say

Thursday, June 21, 2007

BY TOM BOWMAN
Of The Patriot-News

At first, the Loysville nursing student didn't know why there were "all these cops" in Harrisburg Area Community College's Cooper Student Center Tuesday afternoon.

What she learned chilled her: A 42-year-old man armed with a 9 mm pistol had told another student he had guns in his car and it would be "worse than Virginia Tech" if someone broke into the car, according to police.

Nobody was hurt in the 12:30 incident, in which a man identified by authorities as Horasio Miller of the 3700 block of Green Street, Susquehanna Twp., was taken into custody after police said they found a handgun in his backpack.

"Only a few people realized what was going on," said the woman, who asked to not be named and who said she was seated about four tables away from the man. "He was sitting there typing on a laptop. I think he was trying to look like a student."

Miller, who is not a HACC student, wasn't arrested, but was involuntarily committed for mental evaluation, authorities said. The Dauphin County district attorney's office also had the county sheriff revoke his concealed weapons permit.

In addition to confiscating the 9 mm in Miller's backpack, police took a handgun from his car and two firearms from his home, authorities said.

Susquehanna Twp. police said they have been called numerous times about Miller by neighbors, some of whom said Miller would walk around outside openly wearing holstered handguns.

Tuesday's incident started when a man approached a student in the college cafeteria and said he had guns in his car, Harrisburg Police Chief Charles Kellar said.

The student told an armed HACC security guard that the man had a weapon. The guard called Harrisburg police, then watched him until police arrived, HACC spokeswoman Tracy Mendoza said.

"It would be worse than Virginia Tech if someone broke into my car. I have guns in the car," First Assistant District Attorney Fran Chardo said the man told the student.

Chardo said that would not qualify as a terroristic threat because there has to be an intent to terrorize another person.

"Because of the statement, I was greatly concerned about this fellow," Chardo said. "I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked.

Chardo said he also asked police to involuntarily commit Miller for psychiatric evaluation.

"He is now ineligible to possess firearms because he was committed involuntarily," Chardo said.

Dauphin County Sheriff Jack Lotwick said about 30 of the roughly 4,500 permits issued annually are revoked, mostly at the request of police departments. The office does not keep a count of the permit revocations, but Lotwick said it revokes permits if a person is involuntarily committed.

Susquehanna Police Chief Rob Martin said his officers have been called to Miller's apartment building 22 times since 2004.

Half of those calls were made by Miller for minor reasons, such as a lost cell phone or a recovered bicycle, but Martin said the other half were complaints about Miller from his neighbors. Miller was not charged or cited in any of those incidents, Martin said.

Yesterday, some neighbors said they were worried by the way Miller wore unconcealed guns in holsters while he was in the yard outside of his apartment. Neighbors said they did not want their names used because they were afraid of upsetting Miller.

Neither HACC nor Harrisburg police released information on the incident yesterday.

After Miller was taken into custody on Tuesday, chief HACC spokesman Pat Early sent out an e-mail to the college staff explaining the incident. Early said he did not tell the students or the public about the incident.

"It was something that was handled quickly, quietly. There wasn't anything to tell," Early said. "Our [security] officers approached the man when the Harrisburg police arrived. They determined indeed he was carrying a weapon. He was taken into custody and removed from the campus."

John Sakkas, a HACC student from Lemoyne, said he did not hear about the incident until yesterday, when he arrived for his 8 a.m. speech class.

Sakkas said he would have liked to have known about it sooner.

"If he wasn't a student, there is no reason he should be on campus with a gun," Sakkas said.

Staff writers Ford Turner, Carrie Cassidy and Frank Cozzoli contributed to this report. TOM BOWMAN: 255-8271 or tbowman@patriot-news.com

©2007 The Patriot-News
© 2007 PennLive.com All Rights Reserved.

[madmike]

Sounds like a not-too-bright wannabe cop.

[JohnBT]

"Miller, who is not a HACC student, wasn't arrested, but was involuntarily committed for mental evaluation, authorities said."

"Chardo said he also asked police to involuntarily commit Miller for psychiatric evaluation."

Lots of bad information here. Police do not commit people. They can arrange/apply for the evaluation through the local mental health system, but the evaluation is NOT an involuntary committment. That requires a finding by a judge AFTER the evaluation period. A judge; not the police; not a doctor; a judge or administrative hearing officer in a court setting.

John

[Green Lantern]

Yesterday, some neighbors said they were worried by the way Miller wore unconcealed guns in holsters while he was in the yard outside of his apartment.

The strangeness of Miller aside, is open carry illegal where he lives? If not, his neighbors need to learn to mind their own business....

[Glockman17366]

"The strangeness of Miller aside, is open carry illegal where he lives? If not, his neighbors need to learn to mind their own business...."

Yes, open carry is legal in PA.
That was the whole problem with this entire episode...Miller did absollutely nothing illegal.

One thing i did write to the ADA...altough many of us support HR 2640 (and, BTW, Miller wasn't sent in as a result of HR 2640...that is not law yet...Miller was evaluated under PA law), the minute we see abuse of this limited authority, we gun owners (and there's a lot of us in PA) will ensure this law is modified to prevent such occurances.

[Kentak]

If not, his neighbors need to learn to mind their own business

I think it's Miller needs to mind his own business. Allegedly, he had hacked the phone box to listen to his neighbors phone conversations.

The guy's a nut case.

K

[Green Lantern]

^^^ Source?

[Kentak]

http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriot...530.xml&coll=1

[Dave Workman]

HOLD IT!

Lemme see if I have this straight: This is the Horasio Miller, as described by the Harrisburg newspaper, that somebody is defending?

Police say Miller pointed a gun at his landlord and "hacked" into the telephone box at his apartment building to get free service and to listen to his neighbor's phone calls.

The guy who lived like this?

Miller's apartment was so dirty that the township has deemed it unfit for human habitation, police said. "It was horrendous," Martin said. "The dirt, the filth, mold, mildew."

And who allegedly did this?

Tuesday's incident started when a man, identified as Miller, approached a student in the college cafeteria and said he had guns in his car, police said.

Firearms are prohibited on the community college campus.

Perhaps Kentak has this pretty well pegged.

[Green Lantern]

Okay...so...he's a nut.

Go, GOA...:-/

[Kentak]

Perhaps Kentak has this pretty well pegged.

I try. All I did was a little searching to try to get closer to an unbiased account of the incident. What bothers me is that GOA chose to tell only the version of the account that suited its purpose. GOA has a wild hair up its butt about HR2640. All well and good, but it does its members or its cause no good by misrepresenting issues or telling half-truths. As RKBA folks, we must hold our organizations to high standards of intellectual integrity--or they become no more credible than the anti's who use sloppy argument. Loss of credibility leads to ineffectiveness.

We would also do well to remember there are millions of gun owners and CCW'ers out there. It's just reality to acknowledge that some of them, a very small minority I hope, are less than upstanding individuals. Defending them just because they are gun owners is a mistake until you learn as much as you can about the facts of the situation.

K

[Glockman17366]

"Firearms are prohibited on the community college campus."

No, firearms are not prohibited on the campus per PA law.

[madmike]

And if he's not a student, all they can do is ask him to leave.

I would still tend to defend someone until the facts come out--innocent until proven guilty.

I can't say this guy is a clear danger to himself and others. but he's certainly a twitch.

[Miller]

I beg to disagree with everything being said about Horasio Miller since noone
ever got his side of the story the paper just print one side of it and never asked Horasio about what he said to that lady..