Is it time to talk about any change in gun laws?

[river_boater]

no. They would then find another issue. b

That they haven't found already? I'm not so sure. Based on the emails I receive, they sure seem to be fixated on this one issue almost entirely. Well, that and asking for money...

You'd think if they had a laundry list, it'd be out there.

[bstrawse]

Assault Weapons Ban
Close private gun sale loophole
Magazine restrictions
One gun a month
Limit permit to carry


yeah, I think they have a long list

[river_boater]

Assault Weapons Ban
Close private gun sale loophole
Magazine restrictions
One gun a month
Limit permit to carry

yeah, I think they have a long list

The AWB/Mag Restrictions are pretty-much the same thing, they are always proposed together. Private sales is the "gun show loophole," they are always proposed together, also.

One gun is still an issue. Too many states are shall-issue, so I don't see that one going anywhere. I can't remember the last time I saw one gun mentioned in a Brady or Martens (or any other) anti email. It's almost entirely the gun show loophole.

[Erud]

Assault Weapons Ban
Close private gun sale loophole
Magazine restrictions
One gun a month
Limit permit to carry

yeah, I think they have a long list

The AWB/Mag Restrictions are pretty-much the same thing, they are always proposed together. Private sales is the "gun show loophole," they are always proposed together, also.

One gun is still an issue. Too many states are shall-issue, so I don't see that one going anywhere. I can't remember the last time I saw one gun mentioned in a Brady or Martens (or any other) anti email. It's almost entirely the gun show loophole.

So you are thinking that voluntarily giving up the right for private citizens to sell firearms to each other without needing to ask the federal government for permission will make things better? That is insanely stupid. I really don't care how much whining they do, I'm not willing to give up anything just to make them stop. Their goal is the elimination of private firearm ownership, the "loophole" is just a step along the way.

Have you been following this issue for long?

[Collector1337420]

New guns laws?

Well that's an easy question, NO NO NO NO!

The republicans better do a good job keeping up their "party of NO" thing.

Don't give even an inch or they will take a mile.

[Heffay]

I have some I'd support.

1) Stronger penalties for straw purchases.
2) Mandatory state reporting of mental health issues to the database the FBI uses for background checks (correct me if I'm wrong, but this is currently optional?).
3) $1 "mental health fee" on all new gun purchases.

Things I'd throw on the table as a negotiating chip in order to get things I want (better hunting laws, federal conceal carry rights, public mockery of people who OC, etc):
1) 3 day waiting period for new handgun purchases. (helps cut down on crimes of passion that involve handguns, with exceptions for people who get restraining orders or other emergency decree)

Ok... DEBATE!

[plblark]

2) Mandatory state reporting of mental health issues to the database the FBI uses for background checks (correct me if I'm wrong, but this is currently optional?).

I'm good with the Mandate timely update and sharing / correction of data between local, county, state and Federal ... In a prior legislative session when GOCRA attempted to remove the MN Transferee permit as completely redundant to the NICS check (It IS, it's looking for the same disqualifications in MN), the police testified that they catch people who will fall through the federal cracks. When asked to explain they said that the local / county doesn't always get information to the state and that doesn't always get to the federal system in a timely fashion. To say nothing of how slow the HHS data on mental health is to get to any of the other systems.

This despite the large budget item for electronic records and update which the state has been allocating to HHS and the counties for YEARS!

[tman]

1) 3 day waiting period for new handgun purchases

MN requires a 7 day wait. If you have a PTP/PTC, you are exempt.

[Heffay]

1) 3 day waiting period for new handgun purchases

MN requires a 7 day wait. If you have a PTP/PTC, you are exempt.

See? We can make an improvement to the current system by reducing it to 3 days! All by "compromising"!

[river_boater]

I'm pretty sure HIPPA prevents the sharing of any medical information, including mental health, with anyone.

[plblark]

Involuntary commitments are judicial proceedings, not medical records.

[Mn01r6]

I'm pretty sure HIPPA prevents the sharing of any medical information, including mental health, with anyone.

*except as provided or required by law.

(1) A covered entity may use or disclose protected health information to the extent that such use or disclosure is required by law and the use or disclosure complies with and is limited to the relevant requirements of such law.

[river_boater]

Involuntary commitments are judicial proceedings, not medical records.

What if I'm currently under a psychiatrist's care? Should that disqualify me? There are a lot of unknowns here.

[Heffay]

Involuntary commitments are judicial proceedings, not medical records.

What if I'm currently under a psychiatrist's care? Should that disqualify me? There are a lot of unknowns here.

Well, it should be clearly defined with an escalation procedure put in place to allow for oversight of the process. Of course there are unknowns. It's a complicated proposal, and will require careful analysis. I'm just putting it out there as a starting point for further discussion, such as will it work, will it help, and how could we make it as effective as possible.

[Mn01r6]

Involuntary commitments are judicial proceedings, not medical records.

What if I'm currently under a psychiatrist's care? Should that disqualify me? There are a lot of unknowns here.

Well, it should be clearly defined with an escalation procedure put in place to allow for oversight of the process. Of course there are unknowns. It's a complicated proposal, and will require careful analysis. I'm just putting it out there as a starting point for further discussion, such as will it work, will it help, and how could we make it as effective as possible.

You cannot deprive someone of their 2a rights without due process of law. That due process comes in the form of a criminal conviction, involuntary commitment, etc...

You provide an incentive NOT to get help by saying that seeking help means you have to turn in all your guns. People who voluntarily get help are not the people who want to go on a killing spree.