VA. Governor adresses more gun control

Status
Not open for further replies.
"The CCW shouldn't be the issue, but rather the ability to just have a firearm on campus. No matter how a firearm is carried or stored just the presence of one and the mindset to use it could have ended the entire incident a lot earlier.
Let's not allow our CCW'ers to be like the anti's and let this unfortunate incident be a platform for their personal agenda. The ability to have a firearm on campus should be the subject. Not how you would carry it."

CCW isn't the issue...but to be effective, the weapon would have to be with the carrier.
I don't have an agenda concerning CCW. I do carry, I believe anyone willing and capable of carrying should carry.
Just having a firearm on campus won't help much. The gun has to be on hand.
 
It is a feel-good law, that's all. How will one be deemed mentally incompetant? Most likely when he begins to shoot up his school.
 
The state of VA chose not to share the data with the feds.
Click to expand...

Everyone keeps saying that, but the fact is there was NOTHING TO REPORT. The VA system is computerized and already sends reports to the federal database. The new legislation won't change anything in VA, their system is already in place.

But, he was never involuntarily committed, as the judge ruled for voluntary outpatient treatment. And he never went for treatment, because it was voluntary. Therefore he still met the VA and federal legal requirements to purchase a handgun.

If the judge had commited him to treatment, rather than sweeping it aside, he would have never got through the VA system check. And he checked "NO" on the 4473, as he had never been involuntarily commited, which was true.
 
"32 innocent civilians might be alive today if VA had complied with the Constitution and not forbidden honest people to carry on campus."

Virginia has NO law prohibiting carrying on a college campus.
The VT administration has taken it upon themselves to have a POLICY that no student or employee who does require a firearm to do their job may have a gun on campus.

VT is floating the state preemption law by claiming they are NOT part of the state government (or a subordinate jurisdiction).
A bill to force the universities to obey the law was defeated in committee.
 
Everyone keeps saying that, but the fact is there was NOTHING TO REPORT. The VA system is computerized and already sends reports to the federal database. The new legislation won't change anything in VA, their system is already in place.
Click to expand...

Actually, the new bill would give more money to Virginia to include records that meet the federal requirements; but do not meet Virginia requirements.

But, he was never involuntarily committed, as the judge ruled for voluntary outpatient treatment. And he never went for treatment, because it was voluntary. Therefore he still met the VA and federal legal requirements to purchase a handgun.
Click to expand...

This is a grey area actually. 922(g) says "adjudicated mentally defective OR committed to a mental institution". ATF regulations defined "found by a court to be a danger to himself or others" as "adjudicated mentally defective."

Virginia wasn't actually trying to disqualify Cho (thus the outpatient counseling which under Virginia law would not be reported to NICS) and so Cho didn't get counsel to contest the judge and psychiatrist's preliminary finding that he was a "danger to himself or others."

Since the government has never tried to argue (that I can find) that someone who didn't meet the regulatory definition of "committed to a mental institution" DID meet the regulatory definition of "adjudicated mental defective", we don't really know what would happen if they tried to make that claim. I think it would probably fail looking at what courts have ruled on 922(g) so far. So far I haven't been able to find a case where someone was ruled a prohibited person under 922(g) unless they had an adversial proceeding in front of a court where they were represented by counsel (but I haven't looked at all the relevant cases yet either).

If the judge had commited him to treatment, rather than sweeping it aside, he would have never got through the VA system check. And he checked "NO" on the 4473, as he had never been involuntarily commited, which was true.
 
"Tim Kaine
Supports gun control-used taxpayer money to bus people to anti-gun rally in D.C., and as mayor of Richmond, sought legal advice on suing gun manufacturers. Tim Kaine has an "F" rating from the NRA which is defined as a "true enemy of gun-owners rights." (Richmond Times- Dispatch 5/18/00 and 3/14/99) and (NRA-PVF Candidate Endorsement Chart, 2001)"

They've said some nice things about him regarding his support of Project Exile.
____________________

"The state of VA chose not to share the data with the feds."

Virginia is one of only 22 states that reports any mental health info to NICS. Of the mental health reports to NICS, Virginia has made almost half.

John
 
Yeah, great idea.

But don't forget, the powers that be have been trying to get "homophobia" officially declared a "mental illness".

You know that if they can get away with it, they will also have "fear of government", "love of guns", and other such maladies deemed "mental illnesses" too.
 
In my opinion, the psych system needs to be re-funded so that true nuts can be housed indefinitely.

If the psych system can't put a patient in with a paid bed waiting, then they really don't need to be there.

The Smoking Gun or TMZ published Cho's Temporary Detention Order. A TDO IS an involuntary hold for psych eval.

Having transprted psych patients to psych facilities for way too long, I can tell you that the psych facilities are open door for many people who need to spend extra time inside. Most admissions are 72 hours only. Like having day surgery, but then you go home to get better. Only problem is, psychs don't always appreciate the "getting better" part and are apt to be noncompliant with their meds and follow ups. Same reason we used to lock up TB patients for a year. They's get better, stop their meds, and end up screwing their whole community. But we're a better nation now, we don't do that any more.

Tim Kaine is just enough of a gun rights suporter to say so on TV. Which is to say, NOT!
 
Mental Health /Probate Codes can be interesting. In the past, (Texas) a mental health committment or guardianship created a presumption of incompetence that remained until the individual proved himself competent in court. In recent years the trend has been to add more due process to the mental health code and to abandon the words " Incompetent" or " Person of Unsound Mind" in favor of " Incapacitated."

Guardianships no longer automatically create general incompetence/incapacity but are taylored to the individual case. There is a check list detailing the areas in which the guardian of the person has the decision making power and what areas the ward is considered capable of managing himself. Routinely, with profoundly demented people Every box but one will be checked as being in the perview of the guardian and the court. the ward will be unable to make personal medical decisions, inter into contract, manage is financial affairs In every case I've seen, no matter how afflicted the incapacitated person was, the ward retained the capacity to vote. Apparently the LAW doesn't consider voting to be very important or requiring any degree of judgement.

As of five years ago, buying or owning a gun wasn't mentioned in probate procedings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top