Grand Compromise on Firearms at the National Level

[DavenMaura 62]

My other half's family are gun people. Respect their choice but I'm not on board with it personally. Just seems like so much can go wrong, especially around kids.

[DavenMaura 62]

And it would not have to be each time you bought a weapon. Once you have the permit, you are done.

Here in the Great state of Georgia, I hold a firearms license as does my LPR wife.

When we buy guns we just show our permit and we are done.

I would also be in favor of stiffer penalties . If you obtain a gun illegally and use it in a crime, Draconian measures.

I voted yes and agree that it is balanced and remains constitutional. I would like to see mental health checks in there as well.

I think background checks are crucial here, especially around mental health. But I'm not sure it would be meaningful, since you could be healthy when you buy the gun and then later develop a mental illness or become radicalised. Don't think it would r do much.

[Teddy B 17,252]

I think background checks are crucial here, especially around mental health. But I'm not sure it would be meaningful, since you could be healthy when you buy the gun and then later develop a mental illness or become radicalised. Don't think it would r do much.

Nothing is going to be fool proof, but mental health checks will eliminate some people who should not be possessing a gun.

[DavenMaura 62]

Nothing is going to be fool proof, but mental health checks will eliminate some people who should not be possessing a gun.

I get you. But a snapshot in time is just that. Now regular checks...

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I think a Universal background check combined with screening for mental health issues would be a great start.

[B_J 2,752]

Nothing is going to be fool proof, but mental health checks will eliminate some people who should not be possessing a gun.

How would you envision the mental health check working? I think there could be real issues concerning patient confidentiality.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

How would you envision the mental health check working? I think there could be real issues concerning patient confidentiality.

I think Japan already has this kind of system in place. But I think it would be like anything else, driver's license, applying for the police force, things of that nature.

[B_J 2,752]

I think Japan already has this kind of system in place. But I think it would be like anything else, driver's license, applying for the police force, things of that nature.

I'm just curious how this could work.

If there is somebody who is seeking treatment and who has not done anything violent, would we expect the doctor to report him because there is a possibility of something happening? It will be easy to identify somebody who has a violent past; but the problem seems to be those who have never done anything but then when they finally snap, it's a huge event. How do you identify them before the fact, yet still allow them their basic rights?

[Teddy B 17,252]

How would you envision the mental health check working? I think there could be real issues concerning patient confidentiality.

Any prospective gun owner would have to sign a release for his/her medical records. The actual ins and outs of what is and isn't allowed for passing or failing would have to be stipulated by mental health professionals.

[B_J 2,752]

Any prospective gun owner would have to sign a release for his/her medical records. The actual ins and outs of what is and isn't allowed for passing or failing would have to be stipulated by mental health professionals.

Would this just be for concealed carry or to own any gun?

But you're saying part of the process would be to agree to a mental health check first or just those who are already seeing a mental health professional would have to release their records?

Edited December 7, 2015 by B_J

[Póg mo 1,749]

How about mandatory liability insurance, for people whose guns get used to commit crime?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I'm just curious how this could work.

If there is somebody who is seeking treatment and who has not done anything violent, would we expect the doctor to report him because there is a possibility of something happening? It will be easy to identify somebody who has a violent past; but the problem seems to be those who have never done anything but then when they finally snap, it's a huge event. How do you identify them before the fact, yet still allow them their basic rights?

I think Teddy is on the right path. And someone said insurance as well.

Any prospective gun owner would have to sign a release for his/her medical records. The actual ins and outs of what is and isn't allowed for passing or failing would have to be stipulated by mental health professionals.

Yep.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Any prospective gun owner would have to sign a release for his/her medical records. The actual ins and outs of what is and isn't allowed for passing or failing would have to be stipulated by mental health professionals.

That would be a no go quick

[lostinblue 1,989]

Anyone possessing an illegal gun is 30 years mandatory prison sentence . No parole .

[B_J 2,752]

I think Teddy is on the right path. And someone said insurance as well.

Some of the recent shooters seem to have obvious mental issues and it would be nice if some thing could have been done before the fact. I would love it if it could work, it just seems impossible.

1. I don't think there is any way that people would agree to a mental health check before being allowed to purchase or carry a gun. I'd be curious what the supreme court would think of that.

2. If this would only affect those who are already seeking the help of a mental health professional, then there will probably be an unintended consequence. Once people know that, if they seek help, they could be placed on the no gun list, then a large number of people who need help will never seek it. That just makes our mental health problem here in the US even worse than it is now.

I just don't see an easy answer.