Senate Passes NICS Improvement Act

Status
Not open for further replies.

B. Adams

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
227
Location
Vermillion, SD
Just got an email from the NRA, and I didn't see it referenced elsewhere on this site. Any thoughts on this? It all seems OK on the surface, but I know how that goes. If it actually does what it's supposed to, it seems like a good law, as long as it doesn't get mangled before (if) it becomes law.


And I apogize if this is in the wrong forum, mods please move or delete if appropriate.

Senate Passes NICS Improvement Act
After months of careful negotiation, pro-gun legislation was passed through Congress today. The National Rifle Association (NRA) worked closely with Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to address his concerns regarding H.R. 2640, the National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Act. These changes make a good bill even better. The end product is a win for American gun owners.

The NICS Improvement Act does the following:


Permanently prohibits the FBI from charging a "user fee" for NICS checks.

Requires all federal agencies that impose mental health adjudications or commitments to provide a process for "relief from disabilities." Extreme anti-gun groups like the Violence Policy Center and Coalition to Stop Gun Violence have expressed "strong concerns" over this aspect of the bill-surely a sign that it represents progress for gun ownership rights.

Prevents reporting of mental adjudications or commitments by federal agencies when those adjudications or commitments have been removed.

Requires removal of expired, incorrect or otherwise irrelevant records. Today, totally innocent people (e.g., individuals with arrest records, who were never convicted of the crime charged) are sometimes subject to delayed or denied firearm purchases because of incomplete records in the system.

Provides a process of error correction if a person is inappropriately committed or declared incompetent by a federal agency. The individual would have an opportunity to correct the error-either through the agency or in court.

Prevents use of federal "adjudications" that consist only of medical diagnoses without findings that the people involved are dangerous or mentally incompetent. This would ensure that purely medical records are never used in NICS. Gun ownership rights would only be lost as a result of a finding that the person is a danger to themselves or others, or lacks the capacity to manage his own affairs.

Improves the accuracy and completeness of NICS by requiring federal agencies and participating states to provide relevant records to the FBI. For instance, it would give states an incentive to report those who were adjudicated by a court to be "mentally defective," a danger to themselves, a danger to others or suicidal.

Requires a Government Accountability Office audit of past NICS improvement spending.


The bill includes significant changes from the version that previously passed the House, including:

Requires incorrect or outdated records to be purged from the system within 30 days after the Attorney General learns of the need for correction.

Requires agencies to create "relief from disabilities" programs within 120 days, to prevent bureaucratic foot-dragging.

Provides that if a person applies for relief from disabilities and the agency fails to act on the application within a year-for any reason, including lack of funds-the applicant can seek immediate review of his application in federal court.

Allows awards of attorney's fees to applicants who successfully challenge a federal agency's denial of relief in court.

Requires that federal agencies notify all people being subjected to a mental health "adjudication" or commitment process about the consequences to their firearm ownership rights, and the availability of future relief.

Earmarks 3-10% of federal implementation grants for use in operating state "relief from disabilities" programs.

Elimination of all references to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulations defining adjudications, commitments, or determinations related to Americans' mental health. Instead, the bill uses terms previously adopted by the Congress.
 
Granted, I am not totally up to snuff on this issue, but this seems WAY better than the previous version.

If this is a 'complete' article, it's pretty hard for me to find something wrong here, other than concerns about there being a system at all.
 
Bad legislation.

There are a few of us who still believe that "shall not be infringed" means just that. Once again NRA's whoring out our RKBA for political points.
 
If the writer, R. Adams is correct, there will be that proverbial High Old Time in House-Senate Conference Committee. I'd love to be that fly on the wall re listening in on what goes on there.
 
The major concerns, the relief from disabilities and the hap-hazard methods of adjucating a defective appear to be addressed. I also like the fact they fixed the long since broken Relief program with one that is required, and has a very set time-frame. No more spending years trying to clear your name through an attourney, only to be shot down without a hearing and left owing a lot of legal expenses. At least, that's the way I read it.
Face it folks, we knew they had to have something to appease the morons who think removing guns is the answer. They got something to chew on, which after the long fight we put up, is something that is actually useful, if still inconvenient, and arguably unconstitutional. If we're going to have NICS forced upon us (until we can remove it), we might as well have something that kinda sorta works like it's supposed to.

Would this act have stopped VT if it had been in place? Probably not. Can it stop others? Maybe. We'll see the stats when the first AG report comes out on it.
 
Once again NRA's whoring out our RKBA for political points.
Really? All of the listed changes (assuming correctly stated) significantly "dial back" the infringement of the original Brady Act, i.e., partially restoring our infringed RKBA. I can't agree that this is "whoring out" our rights.
 
jaholder, Yeah you're right. it is bad legislation. But guess what, it was going to be passed with or without the NRA's input. I for one am very glad that the NRA was there to make this piece of legislation as painless as possible.

RH
 
Nice.

Senator Coburn forced some changes.

Now if only the Democrats will agree to them. Methinks they will because John Dingell is their point man on this issue.
 
Having not read the actual bill I wont comment on it, except to say, can any of you who think this is a "good thing" identify a single gun control bill passed on a federal level which hasn't been abused?
 
Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks

Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks
http://www.vpc.org/press/0712nics.htm

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Leading national gun violence prevention organizations today warned that a bill intended to improve the records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) -- the national system used to screen gun buyers -- has been hijacked by the gun lobby and would now do far more harm than good.


The "NICS Improvement Act" passed today by the Senate would:


-- Resuscitate a failed government program that spent millions of dollars annually to allow persons prohibited from buying guns to regain the ability to legally acquire firearms. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would be required to establish a "relief from disability" program to allow persons now prohibited from possessing a firearm because they have "been adjudicated as a mental defective" or "committed to a mental institution" to apply to have their bar on firearms possession removed. As a result of the bill, more than 116,000 individuals would be eligible to apply. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) used to run a similar program that, in addition to those with mental disabilities, even allowed felons to apply for "relief." Annual costs for the ATF program ballooned to more than $4 million in 1991, with an average cost of $4,800 per applicant and 43 full-time employees dedicated to processing the applications. Congress shut down the ATF program in 1992 because of its high cost, inefficiency, and threat to public safety. Under the bill, states would also be required to establish such "relief" programs to restore the gun privileges of those with mental health disabilities in order to be eligible for potential grant money to upgrade records submitted to the NICS.


-- Set an arbitrary time limit for the VA to act on applications for "relief." If the agency fails to act within 365 days, applicants could file a lawsuit asking a court to restore their gun privileges, even if Congress fails to provide the VA with the appropriate resources to process these investigations. Some prevailing applicants would be entitled to attorneys' fees. This provision is contrary to a unanimous 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ATF's failure to act on a relief application from a felon (because of lack of appropriations) did not constitute a denial that would entitle the applicant to judicial review. The decision noted that courts are ill-equipped to make decisions on individual applications for "relief" under the standards that would apply under the "NICS Improvement Act," stating: "Whether an applicant is `likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety' presupposes an inquiry into that applicant's background -- a function best performed by the Executive, which, unlike courts, is institutionally equipped for conducting a neutral, wide-ranging investigation. Similarly, the `public interest' standard calls for an inherently policy-based decision best left in the hands of an agency."


-- Significantly narrow the category of records of people with mental disabilities that would be submitted to the NICS by the federal government. The current permanent bar on persons with certain health disabilities would be replaced with temporary restrictions.


Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, states, "This bill was intended to be Congress' response to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech that left 32 people murdered. But rather than focusing on improving the current laws prohibiting people with certain mental health disabilities from buying guns, the bill is now nothing more than a gun lobby wish list. It will waste millions of taxpayer dollars restoring the gun privileges of persons previously determined to present a danger to themselves or others. Once a solution, the bill is now part of the problem."


Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, "It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced the Senate into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need."


Robyn Thomas, executive director of the Legal Community Against Violence, comments, "The bill's original intent, to increase reporting of state records to the NICS database, is an important objective that would improve enforcement of federal laws governing persons prohibited from possessing firearms. The changes made by the gun lobby risk undermining those laws, and we call on the House to have a full debate on the merits of this legislation."

Violence Policy Center
 
Bad legislation.

There are a few of us who still believe that "shall not be infringed" means just that. Once again NRA's whoring out our RKBA for political points.

But you and others who don't like this bill probably could ignore its new provisions. If you find that you have failed a NICS check because of inaccurate information or other problems, I think you can still choose to not correct those mistakes.

Under the current system nobody can do it. With this system there's a chance to do it. So it seems good to let the people who want to correct mistakes have an opportunity to try. I'm sure no one would prevent anyone from not trying.

There's also the possibility of ignoring the NICS system entirely and present a copy of the Second Amendment whenever you want to buy a firearm from a dealer. Simply tell the dealer that the Second Amendment gives you that right. Might work as well then as it does now.

I just read the Violence Policy Center press release that was posted while I was writing this message. It's thrilling to see that once again I am a member of "The Gun Lobby." Without the NRA I would be an ordinary person. Now I am somebody important. When the Violence Policy Center realizes the danger in chocolate chip cookies, I might be a member of "The Chocolate Chip Cookie Lobby" too. Only in America could a nobody like me become so influential and exotic just by being a consumer.
 
It sounds to me like the changes that NRA got implemented are good.

Here is a quote from a gun control wonk.
Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, "It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced the Senate into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need."

Many people who return from military combat duty today (and in the past) have need for some counseling. I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that if they presently seek this counseling, they are declared unable to purchase or own firearms because they are considered mentally unstable. I think this is unfair, and it appears that the new legislation will correct this.

I would estimate that only a very small percentage of those who seek counseling have severe enough mental problems which should prevent them from owning firearms. Perhaps some recent veterans who have experience with this issue can speak with more authority on the matter?????

Of course, I don't think this applies to only military veterans. It could apply to anyone who seeks some mental health care.
 
I love how they made the Relief clause look like it's only for re-arming mass-murderers and felons. The fact is, if you've been convicted of a felony in the past, it can't be overturned by this act. If you've been mistakenly ID's as a felon, as that posting somewhere about a guy in Georgia was because of a clerical error, then this can help you. If you're a committed psycho that thinks the government is broadcasting things into your brain that tell yo to kill everyone you know, this cannot help you. If you're a Vietnam Veteran who spent time in a hospital dealing with the affects of PTSD, and after the long, painful healing process you're now a healthy functioning member of society, this can help restore your rights that you paid for many times over.

The writing above tells us what we need to know. The antis had us by the balls because of the old system, which they trumpeted, failed at VT. They had a legislation that gave the AG total authority (planning on a Democrat win, no doubt), screwed us even more, and it was all "for the children." It was in their pocket and on the way to the bank!!!!

We wrote in, made ourselves heard, and the elected folk listened, because they had to in order to survive in their jobs. Leaders came forward, worked to make this bill do what the antis told us it was supposed to do (a vast difference from what it was written to do), and we not only didn't lose, we actually gained in an incredibly important area, the Relief from Disability.

There are some here that feel any legislation is an infringement. That we shouldn't compromise on anything. Look around at our country!!! With all of these shootings in "Gun Free" zones, the people that are in the middle are becoming polarized to one side or the other. When they thought they wee safe, they could back the grabbers' legislation. Now, the people are understanding that they are not protected by the police everywhere, and that if they want to protect themselves, they have to change the laws they didn't think about before, because when their back was turned, someone took their God-given self-protection rights away. It was the interests groups and their sneaky bastards in Congress the past two decades!!!

There are two ways to fix a piece of legislation in our country. The quick way and the agonizingly slow way. The quick way is Revolution. We're not at that point yet, and I hope we never come to it, because our Founding Fathers' vision might not survive it. The slow way is to work through the system to remove, or rewrite the bad legislation. To do this, we only have to be dilligent, alert, and most importantly, be the voice of reason. Fighting knee-jerk emotionalism with fact is the best way to make people understand our side.
We also have to hold our legislators accountable for their actions. Somewhere along the line it became understood that being in Congress is a right for a few, not a privilage given by The People. That the right allows one to rule, rather than serve.
The Legislators that drafted that final version are likely the ones who understand the difference and know their place is one of responsibility that sits on thin ice. The ones that wrote the first "evil" version are the other type.

I don't see this as an infringement, I see it as a compromise that is leaning heavily in our favor. That might not sit with some people, but I'm encouraged by it, and I'm going to make my voice heard more often. Maybe we can get our Congress-critters to lift the '86 ban just to get us to shut up and stop e-mailing them. :D
 
Let's hope it provides some relief for the 83,000 plus veterans, parents, spouses and children who have been found "mentally defective" or in the household with them and barred from their 2nd A rights.
 
The passage of that bill is a good step forward in correcting many problems with NICS as well as letting the system to do a better job checking on people with real mental problems. The fact that the "gun ban gangsters" oppose it is enough to show me it is good for us.

Jim
 
Pete409:

I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that if they presently seek this counseling, they are declared unable to purchase or own firearms because they are considered mentally unstable.

Not as a matter of routine AFAIK; it *is* true that a bunch of folks in this situation were added to the list under Clinton-this bill was suppossed to address that also.

But I am concerned; the defininition of mental illiness and what constitutes an 'adjudication' or 'finding' thereof is mutable and often subject to the whims of folks who are very anti RKBA. It is telling that homosexuality was an identified mental illiness just thrity years ago (not wanting to go on a tangent, but a very solid example in recent memory of how things can change). Also telling is the language of the 'anti' folks eager to brush asside the rights of disabled or recovering veterans so lightly.
 
As a Vet I find it highly insulting to be singled out. This is a way of disarming those who know firearms and how to use them. Can't get behind this one.
 
Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks
http://www.vpc.org/press/0712nics.htm

The "weeping and gnashing of teeth" coming from the VPC is about enough to confirm my feeling that this bill is now much better than it was before...

YES, it, like all gun control, is an infringement on the 2A.

YES, the bill was going to be passed with or without the input of the so-called "gun lobby." If they're able to put in some darn good provisions, all the better for us, no?

The alternative, seems to me, would be letting the gun-grabbers dictate ALL the terms on this thing. IE, our fears of "You've seen a shrink/taken a prozac, or ritalin - NO GUNS FOR YOU, buh-bye!!!" would be likely come to pass!
 
As a Vet I find it highly insulting to be singled out. This is a way of disarming those who know firearms and how to use them. Can't get behind this one.
Too late. "That one," which insulted vets such as you, was passed more than a decade ago. "This one" provides you with a significant relief from "that one." Now which one do you want to "get behind"?

YES, it, like all gun control, is an infringement on the 2A.
The original NICS law, yes. The amended law, yes, but now to a lesser degree.
Would total repeal be better? Yes! Would you prefer no improvement at all?
 
doc2rn:
As a Vet I find it highly insulting to be singled out. This is a way of disarming those who know firearms and how to use them. Can't get behind this one.

Nobody could blame you for feeling highly insulted to be singled out as a veteran, doc, but are you sure you understand this bill?

This bill helps veterans who lost their rights unfairly by mistakes and other errors introduced by the present NICS system. The bill does not disarm those who know firearms and how to use them. It doesn't create any new class of people to disarm and it gives people who were disarmed wrongly ways to restore their rights.

Read the Violence Policy Center's press release and you should see that the gun grabbers are angry about this bill because it's a serious setback for them.

The Violence Policy Center (VPC) is especially angry that the bill does not disarm veterans and that it allows those veterans who have been unfairly treated to get relief by shifting some presumptions from against them to in their favor. A VPC complaint is that the bill would

Set an arbitrary time limit for the VA to act on applications for "relief." If the agency fails to act within 365 days, applicants could file a lawsuit asking a court to restore their gun privileges, even if Congress fails to provide the VA with the appropriate resources to process these investigations.

NICS today allows veterans to be treated badly and it gives them no way out. This bill reduces the ability of the VA and others to treat veterans badly. It also gives veterans who have been treated badly a way out.

Do you really want to prevent beneficial changes in the NICS system on the theory that some people have: because they don't want NICS at all they think it's better for as many people as possible to suffer under the present NICS instead of changing NICS to help veterans and others.

Defeat of this bill is what the Violence Policy Center wants. Are you sure that's what you want too? Gun grabbers must be surprised by support from gun owners, but I bet they appreciate it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top