Schumer's Solution: Firearms Disqualifications for Drug Use

[gc70]

Politically, Schumer's idea has by far the best prospect of happening of any of the gun control proposals that have recently been floated. Since it involves an administrative determination and action, Congress is not involved. And the selling point that the Arizona shooter could have been stopped if the military had reported his drug use and disqualification to NICS will have great appeal in many circles.

Legally, I see substantial problems for Schumer's proposal. Applying it to past drug use would probably not stand up in court. Applying it to recent or current drug use might well survive a court challenge. That would lead to another issue - once a name goes into NICS, it is extremely hard to remove.

 

[natman]

I had a buddy of mine who got disqualified from the military for like a year for admitting to smoking pot. It had been within the time frame they were asking at the time. That was 1997. He was 18 then.

Now he is a clean cut every day average Joe who is 32 years old. He doesn't use any illegal drugs. And hasn't since his adolescent days.

Is Chuck implying that his 13 year old MEPS record could be used today to bar him from owing firearms?

Schumer isn't implying any such thing. He's flat out said it. Any admission of illegal drug use EVER to a federal official and no guns.

If someone admits to a federal official that he's used illegal drugs, that information should be sent to the FBI so that person can be disqualified from purchasing a gun, Sen. Chuck Schumer said Sunday.

Remember, no circumvention of due process is too extreme as long as it's applied to gun owners.

 

[tmorone]

Conforting that you can qualify for a top secret clearance if you've smoked pot, but this guy doesnt want you to own a gun. :barf:

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I think some presidents of both parties would have to give up their guns, Chuck.

I've read that George Washington might have ... . Drop that musket, George.

Seriously, there may be a move to tighten up reporting of offenses as compared to current practice. Also, the dropping of charges for rehab - might that be threatened? Is that a good idea?

The Tucson shooter had more problems than pot - so discussing that is a diversion from serious discussions of mental health.

 

[Musketeer]

I'm not claiming to be from the left or right side of the aisle but I am from Long Island NY and we know a thing or two about Schumer. Just like the most dangerous place to be in Africa being between a Hippo and water as it is on the way back so is the most dangerous place to be in NY being between Schumer and a camera. Dems and Reps agree on that here. In that light just understand that his number one goal is always camera time. While his proposal is one of the easies to put in place his ADD while diving infront of the camera for the latest headline will cause him to move on if dissuaded early enough.

 

[tyme]

Yet another step in the continued social vilification of past or recreational drug users by social conservatives. That classification apparently includes Schumer, strangely enough.

 

[jimpeel]

It seems that the currently sitting president has smoked marijuana and we have the pics in addition to his own admission. I guess he would be disallowed the possession of a firearm under Schumer's rules.

 

[alloy]

It seems that the currently sitting president has smoked marijuana and we have the pics in addition to his own admission. I guess he would be disallowed the possession of a firearm under Schumer's rules.

While we get the medical records set up for The Affordable Patient Healthcare Act over the next few years, President Obama can buy a firearm. Seems reasonable.
Once any clerk with a SSN can access needed records, we'll be able to catch earlier problems and better determinations can obviously be made at an appropriate agency.
Most of the ambiguities will eventually be worked out, but a system just isn't set up for all of this yet.

 

[bikerbill]

If you don't have drugs in your system which can be detected by testing, WHY would you answer yes?? "Don't do drugs, kay??"

 

[Dead]

what is there to stop a rabid anti-gun "federal official" from simply saying someone stated they took illegal drugs, even though no such statement was made? How would this play out in the courts if the "statement" was challenged? Will it come down to "he said she said"? I could see this happening frequently.

 

[gc70]

Interesting information from the Washington Post.

If Loughner had been put on the prohibited list in 2008, he would have remained there for one year under the rules of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces federal gun law.

The article quotes John A. Strong, the FBI section chief who oversees NICS.

Anyone can end up on the list if it can be determined that the person has abused drugs within a year, Strong said.

 

[J.Keefer]

Pretty simplistic

Seems pretty simple to me. Don't use drugs.Drugs are illegal (except medically). If you smoke pot-illegal-always!
If I had a beer last night - legal .now if I' m an alcolholic-that's a different story.

It's like the speeders,etc. that get caught on camera and are sent fines. They bitch and moan and complain. All they have to do is follow the speed limits and traffic laws. Cameras don't bother me at all. Either do the drug laws.

Having said that, Chuck Schmers an anti-gun orifice who needs to be fought every step.Can't let him get his foot in the door!

Language, tut tut


GEM