PDA

View Full Version : SJ Mercury Editorial: Will we allow the next nut to buy a gun?"


Zin_dawg
04-26-2007, 1:03 PM
Just what you would expect: holding up California's more restrictive laws as a minimum for Federal law.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_5754071?nclick_check=1
or
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5754071?source=email

I'm working on my letter to the editor.

=Marcel

Technical Ted
04-26-2007, 1:05 PM
Next time include the article in your post so I don't have to give up my personal information to the paper's marketing department.

JOEKILLA
04-26-2007, 1:15 PM
Here you go, saves everyone from typing in false personal information :D



Editorial: Will we allow the next nut to buy a gun?
COMPROMISE BILL IS LIKELY, WON'T PROVIDE SAFEGUARDS
Mercury News Editorial
San Jose Mercury News
Article Launched:04/26/2007 01:36:40 AM PDT

After last week's massacre at Virginia Tech, Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader in the Senate, urged against a "rush to judgment" on new gun laws. President Bush said that "now is not the time to do the debate" on gun controls.

If not now, why? If not now, when?

Seung-Hui Cho's killing spree showed how easy it remains for a deranged person in many parts of America to buy a gun. Congress must fix and strengthen the federal law that prohibits selling weapons to the mentally ill. And it should look at other protections, including re-enacting the ban on military-style weapons, covering semiautomatic rifles, that it let expire three years ago. It should do so now, while the public remains incensed over the killings in Virginia.

Cho bought two semiautomatic pistols, one from a pawn shop and one from a gun dealer. He should not have been able to; his name should have appeared in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, a database that lists the name of those disqualified from purchasing weapons. The list includes felons, those convicted of domestic violence, individuals with restraining orders against them and those found by a court to be mentally ill.

Two years ago, after two female students at Virginia Tech complained that Cho was stalking them, a district court judge declared him mentally ill and, after a psychiatric evaluation, ordered outpatient treatment. Because he was not sent to a psychiatric institution, Virginia took the position that Cho remained qualified to buy a gun - an incorrect interpretation of federal law.

Virginia's governor indicated that the state will now comply with the federal requirement. A bigger problem is that most states either don't provide mental illness orders to the FBI or haven't automated their records to make it easier to share the information.

For five years, a bill to provide states with money to computerize their records and penalize those that didn't has languished. The sponsor, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., is hopeful that the Virginia Tech tragedy will finally spur action, without opposition of the National Rifle Association.

Whatever compromise may emerge won't go far enough to end giant loopholes in the federal law. It won't require buyers in private gun sales to submit to a federal background check (California requires this); and it won't extend the waiting period beyond a maximum of three days, to allow a more thorough records search. (California has a 10-day wait.) Timorous Democrats, cowed by the gun lobby and worried about protecting their slim majority in Congress, won't broach renewing the assault-gun ban.

If not the carnage at Virginia Tech, what possible tragedy could spur Congress and the president to act?

Technical Ted
04-26-2007, 1:18 PM
Thanks Joe

anotherone
04-26-2007, 3:34 PM
Just what you would expect: holding up California's more restrictive laws as a minimum for Federal law.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_5754071?nclick_check=1
or
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5754071?source=email

I'm working on my letter to the editor.

=Marcel

Frankly it would be wonderful if Cali's laws were passed on the Federal Level. Then instead of talking trash about us, we could tell residents of other states, "I told you so!" and we could all focus on SB-23 and AB-15 as an entire nation the way we should have been the last 10 years.

jumbopanda
04-26-2007, 3:54 PM
and it won't extend the waiting period beyond a maximum of three days, to allow a more thorough records search. (California has a 10-day wait.) Timorous Democrats, cowed by the gun lobby and worried about protecting their slim majority in Congress, won't broach renewing the assault-gun ban.


1. Cho purchased his guns more than 10 days prior to the shooting.
2. With modern technology, you don't need several days to do a "more thorough records search". If the info in is the records, it will show up immediately. Unless you expect gun store owners to hire a private investigator to spy on their customers each time a sale is made, there is no point to having a long waiting period.

no2statism
04-26-2007, 3:59 PM
Congratulations to the Mercury News on an over 5% drop in readership this year! I read on Drudge this morning that it had one of the steepest declines in the nation. With editorials like this, I can see why.

Steyr_223
04-26-2007, 5:05 PM
Added by comment as Rod..Poor Editorial, did not support the Antigun view with any logic or conviction..Just kneejerk emotion..

triggerhappy
04-26-2007, 9:34 PM
Egad. What a pile of tripe.The author, the article, and the paper.

CalNRA
04-26-2007, 9:36 PM
yes, magazine disconnect, chamber indicator, and a gunlock included with the gun would have done something to help? :rolleyes:

Glasshat
04-26-2007, 10:37 PM
If Cho was prohibited from buying guns, he would have made a bomb out of diesel and fertilizer. Crazy people who want to murder others are not going to be stopped by a lack of guns.

triggerhappy
04-27-2007, 8:23 AM
If Cho was prohibited from buying guns, he would have made a bomb out of diesel and fertilizer. Crazy people who want to murder others are not going to be stopped by a lack of guns.

No, but they can be stopped by a plethora of them ;)

PanzerAce
04-27-2007, 10:23 AM
You know, I am honestly posting just to express my gratification that I no longer read the Merc

bwiese
04-27-2007, 10:43 AM
Relax.

We're all gun nuts according to Alison.

rips31
04-27-2007, 6:06 PM
yes, magazine disconnect, chamber indicator, and a gunlock included with the gun would have done something to help? :rolleyes:

no, but the drop-test would have ensured that he couldn't toss the gun into a classroom and have it spray the room by itself w/o having to reload. :rolleyes:

Rem1492
04-27-2007, 6:13 PM
why shoudn't crazy people be allowed to buy a gun.

...they can legally buy a 500+horsepower, 4 wheeled, 2 ton machine that can plow into anything (including crowds of people, search muslim student (http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=3118) who did this) with enough force to flatten it then blow it up with 30+ gallons of high octane gasoline from the local ARCO. I suppose legal, as long as CA gets their veh. registration fees.