Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NC SB 2081 - revoke gun rights of ALL mental patients (even OUTPATIENT!)

Discussion in 'Activism' started by Green Lantern, Jun 18, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    From GOA:

    This really is the "worst case scenario" come to life, is it not?

    Your kid has ADHD - no guns for him!
    You are a little stressed and need a little something to help you sleep - no guns for you!
    Your wife gets a little jittery at times, needs a little something to help with that - no guns for her!

    I wonder if these miserable [unable to come up with a High Road adjective at the moment ;) ] that wrote this bill can begin to FATHOM how many people in the state - and the NATION - receive "outpatient" mental treatment?!?!
     
  2. lazyeye

    lazyeye Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Messages:
    155
    Location:
    Springfield, OR
    They want to disarm ex-military personnel (and the rest of us).

    Remember the bonus army? Picture them with ar-15s, demo knowledge and knowledge in insurgency fighting.

    *warning, the above may be overly-reactionary and at least a little bit tongue in cheek. take with .5gr salt.
     
  3. HIcarry

    HIcarry Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Hawaii has a "similar" provison that allows access to mental health records prior to obtaining the required permit to aquire a firearm...there have been many, many stories about people being turned down for such things as bedwetting as a child, "depression" after the death of a family member or a divorce, and, I believe, PTSD.
    Do everything you can to prevent it's passage...
     
  4. B.D. Turner

    B.D. Turner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    719
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    NC has another law that prohibits persons convicted of domestic violence from owning/possessing firearms. This could be as simple as making a minor threat and the victim taking out a warrant. Have a spat with your wife, girlfriend, x wife, x girlfriend, You could loose your gun rights.
    NC has a declining mental health program and is wanting all mental health to be private. The back lash is thousands of mental patients filling the county jails. These people do not need firearms no doubt.
     
  5. Thernlund

    Thernlund Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,347
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
  6. B.D. Turner

    B.D. Turner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    719
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    The NC General Statute is 50b. The North Carolina law goes a bit more than just banning those convicted. If you are served with a warrant for domestic violence you cannot possess a firearm even if you are not convicted until you go to court. I know of several people who had to surrender their firearms to the sheriff until their case was settled.

    The scary thing about the firearms/ mental health bill is how mentally ill is too ill? Who draws the line? Taking paxal for mild depression? Could be over the line, but is it?
     
  7. Huddog

    Huddog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    626
    Location:
    Georgia
    I lived in NC for the first 35 years of my life and for the first time I am happy I no longer live there. I believe NCIS providing this info is in itself a violation of HIPPA laws and may be a way to attack this. Personally I do think the NC statute is in violation of Federal law.
     
  8. B.D. Turner

    B.D. Turner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    719
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    So where would you draw the line for gun ownership with the mental patient?
     
  9. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Ahhh...how I cursed HIPAA when I first heard the dire predictions of how IT could destroy our medical system with red tape...

    Now, though...? :)

    Then again - I'm not positive, but way back when I applied for my CCW license, seems I recall having to check a box that gives the sheriff access to my medical (or was it specifically mental health) records?

    I got the permit, but as I said it was some time back..

    Me? No guns for anyone while in a mental hospital. Once they get OUT of said hospital, they're good to go. Because if they're still too dangerous to be trusted with a gun - why the heck are they being RELEASED???? Same answer for prisoners, btw.

    The State? Sounds like they're on BATFEs page - ANYONE who sees a psychiatrist/therapist/psychologist and is treated for something - "no soup for YOU!"
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2008
  10. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Never takes long.

    At the Second Amendment.
     
  11. NC-Mike

    NC-Mike Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,227
    Did anyone READ the bill...

    SECTION 1. G.S. 122C‑54 is amended by adding the following new subsection to read:

    "(d1) After a judicial determination that an individual shall be involuntarily committed for either inpatient or outpatient mental health treatment pursuant to Article 5 of this Chapter, the clerk of court shall, as soon as practicable, transmit a report of the commitment to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The clerk shall also report a record where an individual is found not guilty by reason of insanity or found mentally incompetent to proceed to trial. The Clerk, upon receipt of documentation that an affected individual has received a relief from disabilities pursuant to G.S. 122C‑54.1 (18. § U.S.C. 925(c),) shall update the person's record in the NICS This record of involuntary commitment shall be accessible only by an entity having proper access to NICS and shall remain otherwise confidential as provided by this Article. The Administrative Office of the Courts and the Department of Health and Human Services shall establish protocols to facilitate the transmission of this information to NICS."

    SECTION 2. Article 3 of Chapter 122C of the General Statutes is amended by adding the following new section to read:

    "§ 122C‑54.1. Restoration of right to purchase firearm.

    (a) Any individual over the age of 18 may apply for the restoration of the right to purchase, possess, or transfer a firearm when the individual no longer requires treatment or medication for a condition which resulted in the individual's involuntary commitment for either inpatient or outpatient mental health treatment pursuant to Article 5 of this Chapter. No individual who has been found not guilty by reason of insanity may petition a court for restoration of the right to purchase, possess, or transport a firearm.

    (b) Subsequent to a judicial determination that an individual is subject to the commitment procedures in Article 5 of this Chapter, and ordered to undergo either inpatient or outpatient treatment, the individual, if over the age of 18, and upon the expiration of any current inpatient or outpatient commitment, may file a petition for an adjudication by the district court judge that the petitioner is no longer undergoing treatment or medication for a condition that resulted in commitment and is no longer a danger to himself or others for purposes of the purchase, possession, or transfer of firearms pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 922 and G.S. 14‑404 and G.S. 14‑415.12.

    (c) The petition must be filed in the district court of the county where the respondent was the subject of the most recent judicial determination that either inpatient or outpatient treatment was appropriate. An individual disqualified from firearms possession due to a comparable out‑of‑State mental commitment shall make application in the county of residence. The clerk of court upon receipt of the petition shall schedule a hearing using the regularly scheduled commitment court time and provide notice of the hearing to the petitioner, the district attorney, and designated representative for the North Carolina Attorney General's office. Copies of the petition must be served on the director of the inpatient and outpatient treatment facility, in-State or out‑of‑State, the district attorney in the petitioner's current county of residence, and a designated representative for the North Carolina Attorney General's office.

    (d) Contemporaneous with the petition, the petitioner must file an affidavit by a psychiatrist or eligible psychologist that the petitioner is no longer undergoing treatment or medication for a condition resulting in commitment and is no longer a danger to himself or others for purposes of the purchase, possession, or transfer of firearms. The burden is on the petitioner to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner's possession of firearms no longer poses a danger to himself or others. The district attorney or designated representative from the North Carolina Attorney General's office shall present any and all relevant information which may establish that the petitioner's possession of firearms would pose an undue risk of harm to the petitioner or the public. For these purposes, the district attorney or designated representative from the North Carolina Attorney General's office may access and use any and all mental health records, juvenile records, and criminal history of the petitioner wherever maintained. The applicant must sign a release for the district attorney or designated representative from the North Carolina Attorney General's office to receive any mental health records of the applicant. The proceeding shall be open to the public. The decision of the district court may be appealed to the superior court for a hearing de novo. After a denial by the superior court, the applicant must wait a minimum of one year before reapplying.

    (e) Upon a judicial determination that a petitioner's possession of firearms is no longer a danger to the petitioner or the public, the clerk of superior court shall forward the order to the NICS for updating of the respondent's record."

    SECTION 3.(a) G.S. 14‑404 is amended by adding the following new subsection to read:

    "(g) The sheriff shall issue a license or permit for the purchase of a firearm under this section to an individual denied a permit under subdivision (4) of subsection (c) of this section if the individual's rights to purchase a firearm have been restored under G.S. 122C‑54.1.

    SECTION 3.(b) G.S. 14‑415.12(b) is amended by adding the following new subsection to read:

    "(c) The sheriff shall issue a permit for the purchase or possession of a firearm under this section to an individual denied a permit under subdivision (6) of subsection (b) of this section if the individual's rights to purchase or possess a firearm have been restored under G.S. 122C‑54.1."

    SECTION 4. There is appropriated from the General Fund to the Administrative Office of the Courts the sum of twenty‑five thousand dollars ($25,000) for the 2008‑2009 fiscal year to carry out the provisions of this act.

    SECTION 5. Sections 1 through 3 of this act become effective December 1, 2008. Section 4 of this act becomes effective July 1, 2008. The remainder of this act is effective when it becomes law.
     
  12. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    Here's the problem: the more we do to mess with "mental patients", the less likely people are to go get any help they need to avoid having a paper trail.

    If we took away gun rights (and various other rights) from diabetics, we'd have lots of people dying from untreated diabetes. Someone with acute hypoglycemia can be dangerous, so this is not something that couldn't happen, either.
     
  13. gripper

    gripper Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    821
    Location:
    Nashua NH
    I wonder if this bill was inspired by th einfamous "Eppley Memo" within th eVA medical system from 99 or 2000...that was where a VA adminstrator thought it a good idea to breach the confidentiality of treatment records in order to help the Clinton-Reno D of J disqualify many veterans WITHOUT any interaction with th ecriminal justice system...some guy goes to get some help with difficulties and suddenly finds himelf dfisqualified at the point of NICS with no explanation or elaboration.
     
  14. MiddleAgedKen

    MiddleAgedKen Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Fairview Park, OH
    Anyone who cannot be trusted with a gun cannot be trusted without a custodian.
     
  15. NC-Mike

    NC-Mike Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,227
    Its a GOOD bill...

    The key to the bill is INVOLUNTARILY committed. If a person is involuntarily committed they should not be allowed to purchase a firearm till all is well with them.

    Take careful attention as to what the bill does; the clerk of the court updates the NICS system and the individual will not be allowed to purchase a firearm till they can prove they are mentally competent.

    I don't see the problem and its what I call true "common sense gun law"

    The way the opposition will frame any argument against this bill is:

    NRA DEMANDS INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED MENTAL PATIENTS BE ALLOWED TO BUY FIREARMS! :what:
     
  16. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    So, what the devil constitutes being "involuntarily committed" for OUTPATIENT mental treatment exactly???

     
  17. NC-Mike

    NC-Mike Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,227
    Obviously a Doctor would have to commit you to treatment against your wishes. You can also sue that Doctor if he does so I imagine this will be done only when circumstances warrant it. There would have to be a significant event to prompt that kind of medical intervention.

    Do you really want people that have been involuntarily committed to mental health services passing a NICS check and buying firearms? That's exactly what could have been prevented in the VT shootings and gives the RTKABA a bum rap.
     
  18. pyle

    pyle Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    202
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    The problem with these kind of laws has everything to do with the definition of "mental illness". A "phobia" is a type of mental illness. So, you could say that a person who has sought help to overcome the fear of speaking in public (a type of social phobia called glossophobia) has been treated for mental illness.....

    Obviously, this particular law is talking about "involuntary" treatment...However, what's the next step? The person who has sought help for overcoming the fear of speaking in public?

    Social Phobia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_phobia
     
  19. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Mike - wouldn't OUTPATIENT "involuntary commitment" be kind of an oxymoron?

    How is a doctor going to see that a patient takes a treatment he does not want when he's not under supervision inside a hospital - which would be an "INpatient" situation, no?

    And why do you NOT want someone who's been involuntarily committed before buying firearms? After all, if s/he's a free person now and no longer being confined to the hospital/asylum/whatever - they're no longer a danger, right?

    Well, that's how it SHOULD be...

    Am I that far off in my med terminology? Is "outpatient" treatment NOT a situation where a doc gives someone a prescription and sends the patient on their way???
     
  20. EOTechRulesAll

    EOTechRulesAll member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    373
    Location:
    Ohio


    It's a bad bill. If somebody is deemed fit to be outside of a prison or an asylum, that means society (in the case of prisons) or doctors (in the case of asylums) has stamped an approval on that person being able to have a presence within the community. If somebody is fit to be in a community of fellow citizens, then that person is fit to bear arms.


    If somebody is released from prison (even for armed robbery) but is not allowed to have a firearm, then it means they should not have been released to begin with as they are not deserving of trust.

    I've gone on the record before, in debates and discussions, as stating that it is my belief that ex-cons should be allowed to keep and bear arms. If they're fit to be outside of prison, they're fit to bear arms. If not, then they should still be in prison.
     
  21. paintballdude902

    paintballdude902 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,872

    maybe they do and that is exactly what they want
     
  22. jrpbullrider

    jrpbullrider Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Lampasas, TX
    Please some one tell me how can someone be involuntary commitment for outpatient mental health treatment?

    What I would like to know how hard will it be to get their right back?

    I know others have asked but no one said how it can be.
    Thanks
    John
     
  23. NC Dave

    NC Dave Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Cary, NC
    Green Lantern -

    Yes, you authorized your mental health records to be available for review when you applied for your North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permit.
     
  24. NC Dave

    NC Dave Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Cary, NC
    I agree that this is a key point to consider.

    For the record, this is what the NRA Institute for Legislative Action has to say on the issue:

     
  25. B.D. Turner

    B.D. Turner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    719
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    Some on here believe that if you are released by a mental hospital that you are well to live a normal life in society. This would be a better world if this were true however it is not. Mental health is a revolving door. Jails across america are full of people who should be in mental hospitals rather than local lock ups. We house folks for months who scream and beat the walls day and night. Some of these people have been to a mental hospital but many have never been treated anywhere by anyone.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page