PDA

View Full Version : Chucky Schumer pushes for Military reported drug use to ban purchases


GOEX FFF
01-17-2011, 5:03 AM
Ok, Id assume we all know that drugs and firearms don't mix, I think most would agree.

But what I find wrong about this, is someone doesn't even need to be convicted by a court to lose their 2A civil rights, only just based off of what a military recruiter reports what a person may or may not have said during an interview. It seems here like rights would be denied just on hearsay. :rolleyes:

"After Jared Loughner was interviewed by the military, he was rejected from the Army because of excessive drug use. Now, by law, by law that's on the books, he should not have been allowed to buy a gun," Schumer told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"But the law doesn't require the military to notify the FBI about that, and in this case they didn't. So I --this morning -- I'm writing the administration and urging that that be done, that the military notify the FBI when someone is rejected from the military for excessive drug use and that be added to the FBI database," Schumer said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/16/schumer-require-military-report-applicants-drug-use-prevent-gun-purchases/#ixzz1BIglr9Wv

NightOwl
01-17-2011, 5:29 AM
The first person to get denied their gun rights over this and takes it to court is going to win. Unconstitutional, lack of due process.

This thing is BS though. How did it pass in the first place, as a footnote attached to to some gigantic bill?

Skidmark
01-17-2011, 6:55 AM
This thing is BS though. How did it pass in the first place, as a footnote attached to to some gigantic bill?

Nothing has passed, whatever are you referring to? Schumer sent a letter to AG Holder, that's all.

yellowfin
01-17-2011, 7:04 AM
Chuck Schumer would find a way to exclude gun ownership for people whose names contain the letter O or A.

locosway
01-17-2011, 7:10 AM
The FBI investigates local recreational drug use?

uyoga
01-17-2011, 7:16 AM
Schumer and his "Band of Banners" will turn any Second Amendment "molehill" into a Mountain, just to get any restrictive legislation passed.

NightOwl
01-17-2011, 8:13 AM
Nothing has passed, whatever are you referring to? Schumer sent a letter to AG Holder, that's all.

A quote from the article:
"After Jared Loughner was interviewed by the military, he was rejected from the Army because of excessive drug use. Now, by law, by law that's on the books, he should not have been allowed to buy a gun," Schumer told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"But the law doesn't require the military to notify the FBI about that, and in this case they didn't. So I --this morning -- I'm writing the administration and urging that that be done, that the military notify the FBI when someone is rejected from the military for excessive drug use and that be added to the FBI database," Schumer said.

Dreaded Claymore
01-17-2011, 8:19 AM
I don't like excessive drug use any more than the next fellow--in fact, I probably like it quite a bit less. But if something's a big enough problem that you can't be allowed to own firearms, it's a big enough problem to be heard in court before that restriction is made. This damn drug war's got to end. That is all.

Skidmark
01-17-2011, 8:34 AM
A quote from the article:

Ah, you're referring to 21 U.S.C. 802, Controlled Substance act? Federal Law makes it illegal for any unlawful user of a controlled substance, including pot, to own a firearm or ammunition. There's a question to this effect on the forms we fill out when DROS'ing a new gun. Is that question not asked in Arizona?

But should the information on suspected or admitted drug use be shuttled between Federal agencies, and used in a background check prior to purchasing a firearm? I don't think so, as the recruiters may have gotten it wrong, or the applicant may no longer be a drug user. However, for individuals judged to be mentally defective, that information should absolutely be shared, and I assumed it was already.

Steyr_223
01-17-2011, 9:04 AM
Dupe!!!!!!!!!


http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=385094

EOD Guy
01-18-2011, 6:43 AM
The FBI investigates local recreational drug use?

No, but they do run the NICS.

locosway
01-18-2011, 6:44 AM
No, but they do run the NICS.

So he just wants them to add prohibitive information without an actual conviction or charge being made? Nice guy...

Decoligny
01-18-2011, 6:58 AM
Ok, Id assume we all know that drugs and firearms don't mix, I think most would agree.

But what I find wrong about this, is someone doesn't even need to be convicted by a court to lose their 2A civil rights, only just based off of what a military recruiter reports what a person may or may not have said during an interview. It seems here like rights would be denied just on hearsay. :rolleyes:



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/16/schumer-require-military-report-applicants-drug-use-prevent-gun-purchases/#ixzz1BIglr9Wv

And doesn't the current law only prohibit you if you ARE CURRENTLY a user of illegal drugs, or CURRENTLY ADDICTED to drugs?

The current law doesn't prohibit someone who happened to be addicted to cocaine 30 years ago who has been clean ever since, does it?

Decoligny
01-18-2011, 6:59 AM
Chuck Schumer would find a way to exclude gun ownership for people whose names contain the letter O or A.

And would then amend it to include anyone who's name didn't contain O or A.

GrizzlyGuy
01-18-2011, 7:32 AM
And doesn't the current law only prohibit you if you ARE CURRENTLY a user of illegal drugs, or CURRENTLY ADDICTED to drugs?

The current law doesn't prohibit someone who happened to be addicted to cocaine 30 years ago who has been clean ever since, does it?

That's right, at least here in 9th circuit, see here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=4927996&postcount=100). 9th circuit in United States v. Purdy (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1040384.html):

that to sustain a conviction under 922(g)(3), the government must prove ... that the defendant took drugs with regularity, over an extended period of time, and contemporaneously with his purchase or possession of a firearm

Loughner applied to the military back in 2008 so his failure of the military's drug test back then is irrelevant. Schumer's proposal would therefore accomplish nothing, other than to put people into the position of having to prove that they are NOT current drug users.

SuperSet
01-18-2011, 7:42 AM
The thing that gets me is that no one is talking about improving the mental health system to effectively identify, isolate and prevent potentially violent individuals from gun purchases. As gun owners, we have more to fear from these individuals than some anti-gun politician. We're only a razor's edge away from a few nutjob rampages which will lead to even further restrictions for sane, law-abiding citizens.

CCWFacts
01-18-2011, 8:23 AM
How about mandatory random drug testing for all members of Congress, with published results?