Gunman Opens Fire During "The Dark Knight Rises"

[Jeff OTMG]

Mental health issues are a disqualifier for firearms purchase at a federal level and for ownership in many states. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your position, due to the The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) your mental health records are private and cannot be accessed by the government or individuals without a patient waiver. Since it is a mental health issue nothing can be done without giving up a right to privacy. Can you require someone to waive their HIPAA rights to own a firearm? I don't thinks so. If that was the case then should it be applied to other rights as well. If you are not competent should you be allowed to vote, own a gun, or have the right to free speech because it might be hate speech?

[AGDee]

Mental health records were considered highly confidential and more private than standard medical records even before HIPAA. I think the argument of waiving your mental health history privacy leading to waiving other rights because you are mentally ill is just as silly as the argument that allowing gay marriage will lead to allowing marriage to children or animals. There are limits to freedom of speech for the mentally ill already though. There was more than one time that the secret service showed up at inpatient psych program where I was working to interview a patient who had sent threatening mail to the White House, usually right before the sitting President was going to make an appearance in the area. You don't get to say anything you want. You don't get to threaten government officials or presidential candidates.

The difficulty is in the logistics. Mental health records are not centrally stored anywhere. You would have to check records of every mental health facility, independent professional, and even primary care doctors who prescribe mental health medications. There is no mechanism for that. There is also the issue that the first psychotic break usually occurs after adulthood so they could already have a gun. There's really no way to screen for that.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

We don't know how many instances it happens in.

I have years of experience with this topic, Gary Kleck's research, and other research. The debate regarding how much law abiding gun owners actually access their guns--and whether this access ends the way in which the law abiding citizens hope it will end--is the framework for reminding people that simply owning guns and going to gun ranges is an extremely simplistic and surface-level response.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

The NSPOF came up with 3.1 million people committing a DGU. They also go to great lengths to try to discredit the findings. The report also states, 'On the basis of National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data, one would conclude that defensive uses are rare indeed, about 108,000 per year.' The thing is that even if we use that 'RARE' number it is still over 10 times the number of fireamrs homicides (9,146 in 2009).

This does not mean what you think it means and therefore does not contrast what I stated.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

That is pure speculation on your part.

Illustrations of something that has happened for decades:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1728985.html

http://www.news-press.com/article/20...%7Ctext%7C%7Cp

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.a...81474981515959

Helsley R.W and OSullivan A. 2001. Stolen gun control. Journal of Urban Economics. Volume 50: Issue 3: page 436.

Brian Hassler. 2006. Stolen guns sold door to door. Navajo Times. Volume 45, Issue 23, p. A9.

Sarah Abruzzese. 2005. Bill would mandate stolen gun reports. Capital News Service. Page C.2.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

Not similar at all.

Extremely similar. It is a good idea to stop citing yourself, your father, and the relative few people that you know. These topics span beyond what you know from personal experiences. There are many things that happen in this world even if you or someone you know directly has not experienced it--or the people you know have not shared the information with you.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

1. Thank you for pointing out that gun control is not effective.
2. Thank you for pointing out that guns are not the problem.
Chicago doesn't have a gun problem, they have a people problem.

1. Just as I pointed out that gun access is not effective. You do not get to pick and choose what I pointed out.

2. Are you one of those people who says "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Surely people have gotten over that dumb phrase. The fact of the matter is that guns have long been studied as a facilitating factor for types of violent crime and deviance. Common sense and basic intelligence tell us that guns are not mysteriously doing this themselves but rather people are accessing the guns and doing this. That is what it means when researchers, community activists, and law enforcement deem guns as a common and effective source of opportunities and facilitating factors for crime and deviance.

[Jeff OTMG]

A couple of weeks ago and armed civilian took down a murderer by helping police in a shootout. AMAZING shooting on the civlians part. I have very few handguns capable of making that shot, shooter says in was a 'magnum' and the most capable guns would be magnum revolvers, let alone four hits. He is being lauded by the Sheriff for saving the officers life.

http://deadlinelive.info/2012/08/07/...with-a-pistol/

Gee, why didn't we hear about this for hours on CNN? Oh wait, it doesn't fit their political agenda. It would have been better for them if the responding officer(s) had been murdered and other residents of the area. That is what the media wants to see.

[Jeff OTMG]

AGDee, yes, the proposal is to build a centralized database of qualifying mental health records run by the FBI Criminal Justice Services Division out of the facility in Clarksville, WV which is the repository of the crime information used to conduct firearms purchase background checks.

As you pointed out, I don't know if they will be able to alter the privacy rights of individuals. Psycho murderers roaming free is one of the prices we pay to live in a free society. By our Constitution we are innocent until proven guilty, so we cannot lock people up for something that they might do wrong in the future. We must wait until a crime, including a mass murder, is committed. How much freedom are we willing to surrender?

[AGDee]

Yes, we must.

[ASTalumna06]

I didn't even realize they could do this to someone during a trial...

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#story/...nver-20130627/

DENVER (Reuters) - A Colorado judge ruled on Thursday that accused theater gunman James Holmes will be tethered to the courtroom floor by a cable for security reasons during his murder trial, but denied a defense request to sequester the jury.

[barbino]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

I didn't even realize they could do this to someone during a trial...

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#story/...nver-20130627/

This is pretty amazing ... I can't imagine. I enjoyed being on a jury the only time I served on one; but this is one jury that I would not like to be on.