Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumPanel suggests gun seizures for 'substantiated' threats
Such seizures, the panel said Wednesday, would take place after law enforcement "substantiated" reports from mental health providers, social workers and other professionals.
The proposal is among nine recommendations by a task force convened months before December's mass shooting at a Connecticut elementary school that sparked a nationwide debate on gun control and access to mental health services.
The shooting renewed focus on those issues in Maryland, though it was unclear whether the gun-seizure proposal or other recommendations would get attention from state lawmakers already poised to consider an assault weapons ban and limits on the size of magazine clips.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-01-02/news/bs-md-guns-and-mental-illness-20130102_1_gun-access-gun-seizures-mental-health
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)If someone thinks they should walk in public with their weapons of war strapped on themselves then they should be forced to be evaluated.
Still Sensible
(2,870 posts)but this particular proposal seems to lack due process.
SailorMike
(35 posts)is probably against "hippa"? rules (law)?
tjnite
(27 posts)Plus to go around 'siezing' firearms on a social workers- or anyone elses- word is just endangering
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)My summary is as follows:
1. The Task Force noted the need for more research, particularly into the connection between substance abuse and risk for violence, as opposed to mental illness alone.
2. The Task Force recommended that laws be created requiring doctors, counselors, educators, and probation agents to report any credible threat of suicide or serious violence against an identifiable victim to local law enforcement, and for local law enforcement to promptly investigate these reports.
3. The Task Force stated that if such a reported threat is substantiated, LEAs should be empowered to temporarily confiscate any firearms owned by the maker of the threat. A judge should review the case within 14 days and determine whether it is reasonably justifiable. If so, he can uphold the confiscation for up to six months, or until a full hearing can be held to review the evidence.
4. The Task Force noted a need for additional training for LEOs and mental health professionals in dealing with the mentally ill, enforcing firearms law, and understanding reporting requirements. The Mental Health First Aid program was praised as an effective example of such training, and it was recommended that licensed firearms dealers be invited to participate in this training.
5. The Task Force encouraged the creation and expansion of existing "Crisis Intervention Teams," which are teams of law enforcement officers who are specially-trained to deal with police emergencies involving mental illness, and who have additional resources available for this purpose.
6. The Task Force suggested that a portion of the fees currently received from applicants for a Maryland Firearms Dealers' License should be used to fund the other recommendations in the report, such as the mental health training and CITs.
7. The Task Force recommended that the state create a process for those who are disqualified from purchasing or possessing firearms to petition to have this disqualification permanently removed, in accordance with the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)6 medical professionals (including a Maryland Shall Issue representative who is a medical doctor)
5 law enforcement representatives
5 law representatives, and
1 representative for shooting sports.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)bubbayugga
(222 posts)holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)
spin
(17,493 posts)Allowing honest and responsible people to own firearms makes my workplace environment far less safe.
I feel that 99.99% of violent criminals support banning and confiscating all legally owned firearms.
I should note that I am in no way insinuating that you are a violent criminal. You merely have a different view than I.
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)spin: I feel that 99.99% of violent criminals support banning and confiscating all legally owned firearms.
One of the stupidest things I've ever heard regarding the gun debate.
.. even past violent criminals often get their guns from 'law abiding citizens', whether relatives, acquaintances, straw men, or, themselves when their gun rights have been restored thanks sometimes to nra efforts (if they haven't yet committed any violent crimes).
spin to bubbayugga: I should note that I am in no way insinuating that you are a violent criminal. You merely have a different view than I.
I think bubba is not a bona fide democrat, but a fake dem posing as an extremist, only wanting to incite & foment & disrupt the message board by pretending to support extreme gun confiscation by democrats in office, wehen there really is no such effort.
Let bubba keep going, maybe I'm wrong, but he really doesn't fool many people, imo.
.. well th th that's all folks, gonna go out for a sTROLL now.
spin
(17,493 posts)every year.
Mexico has extremely strong gun laws yet the criminal drug gangs have fully automatic assault rifles, RPGs and hand grenades. While it is true that some of the firearms smuggled into Mexico come from our nation, you don't buy fully automatic weapons at Walmart or a Mom and Pop gun store.
If we are unable to quell the flow of drugs into our nation why would you feel that if a market was established for firearms, smugglers would be totally unable to provide them for sale on the black market?
Therefore I will continue to contend that most criminals would support the ban and confiscation of civilian owned firearms. You may label my comment as "stupid" but I feel that it is merely realistic.
When I go to a drug store today and seek some cold medicine containing pseudoephedrine it is no longer on the store shelves. It is now behind the counter and I have to sign for it. Did this new requirement reduce the supply of meth in our country?
Mexican cartels fill demand for meth in USA
5:37a.m. EDT October 11, 2012
ST. LOUIS (AP) — Mexican drug cartels are quietly filling the void in the nation's drug market created by the long effort to crack down on American-made methamphetamine, flooding U.S. cities with exceptionally cheap, extraordinarily potent meth from factorylike "superlabs."
Although Mexican meth is not new to the U.S. drug trade, it now accounts for as much as 80 percent of the meth sold here, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. And it is as much as 90 percent pure, a level that offers users a faster, more intense and longer-lasting high.
"These are sophisticated, high-tech operations in Mexico that are operating with extreme precision," said Jim Shroba, a DEA agent in St. Louis. "They're moving it out the door as fast as they can manufacture it."
The cartels are expanding into the U.S. meth market just as they did with heroin: developing an inexpensive, highly addictive form of the drug and sending it through the same pipeline already used to funnel marijuana and cocaine, authorities said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/11/mexico-cartels-meth/1626383/
For those who seriously believe that passing laws to ban and confiscate all civilian owned firearms in our nation will totally eliminate gun violence, I will suggest they review two very important laws which are not written down but instead are laws of human nature.
1) The law of supply and demand.
2) The law of unintended consequences.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Get a warrant, and you're good to go.
