THE NICS IMPROVEMENT BILL: MYTH AND REALITY
Some opponents of the “NICS Improvement Amendments Act” (H.R. 2640) have spent the last several months painting a picture of the bill that would rightly terrify gun owners—if it was true.
The opponents’ motive seems to be a totally unrealistic hope of undercutting or repealing the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) by ensuring that its records are inaccurate and incomplete. But make no mistake—an inaccurate and incomplete system only serves to delay and burden lawful gun buyers, while failing to screen those who are prohibited from possessing firearms under existing law.
Nonetheless, opponents of H.R. 2640 continue to spread misconceptions about the bill. The following are some of the common myths.
MYTH: “Millions of Americans will awake one day and find that they are suddenly barred from buying guns based upon decades old convictions of ‘misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence,’ or mental health adjudications that were later rescinded or expired.”
FACT: H.R. 2640 does not create any new classes of “prohibited persons.” The NRA does not, and will not, support the creation of new classes of prohibited persons. H.R. 2640 only requires reporting of available records on people who are prohibited from possessing firearms under existing law.
Also, H.R. 2640—for the first time—specifies that mental health adjudications may not be reported if they’ve been expunged, or if the person has received relief from the adjudication under the procedures required by the bill. In those cases, the mental adjudication or commitment “shall be deemed not to have occurred,” and therefore would not prohibit the person from possessing firearms.
MYTH: “As many as a quarter to a third of returning Iraq veterans could be prohibited from owning firearms—based solely on a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder.”
FACT: The only veterans who would be reported to NICS under this bill due to mental health issues are—as with civilians—those who are adjudicated as incompetent or involuntarily committed to a mental institution.
A diagnosis alone is never enough; the person must be “adjudicated as a mental defective,” which is a legal term that implies a fair hearing process. The Veterans’ Administration has regulations that provide veterans with an opportunity for a hearing on those decisions, and an opportunity for multiple appeals—just as a civilian does in state court. Any records that don’t meet this standard could not be reported to NICS, and any deficient records that have already been provided would have to be removed.
Veteran and journalist Larry Scott (operator of the website www.vawatchdog.org) calls the allegation about veterans a “huge campaign of misinformation and scare tactics.” Scott points out that thousands of veterans who receive mental health care through the VA—but have not been found incompetent or involuntarily committed—are not currently reported to NICS, and wouldn’t be reported under H.R. 2640. (Scott’s analysis is available online at http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,151321_1,00.html?wh=wh.)
Last, but not least, H.R. 2640 also provides veterans and others their first opportunity in 15 years to seek “relief from disabilities” through either state or federal programs. Currently, no matter how successfully a person responds to treatment, there is no way for a person “adjudicated” incompetent or involuntarily committed to an institution to seek restoration of the right to possess a firearm.
MYTH: A child who has been diagnosed with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder “can be banned for life from ever owning a gun as an adult.”
“Your ailing grandfather could have his entire gun collection seized, based only on a diagnosis of Alzheimer's (and there goes the family inheritance).”
FACT: Again, a psychiatric or medical diagnosis alone is not an “adjudication” or “commitment.”
Critics base their concern on BATFE regulations that define an “adjudication” to include a decision by a “court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.” They claim any doctor could potentially be a “lawful authority.”
They are wrong. Not even the Clinton Administration took such an extreme position. In fact, the term “lawful authority” was apparently intended to cover various types of government panels that are similar to “courts, boards, or commissions.” Basic principles of legal interpretation require reading it that way. The term also doesn’t override the basic constitutional protections that come into play in decisions about a person’s mental health.
Finally, records of voluntary treatment also would not be available under federal and state health privacy laws, which H.R. 2640 also does not override.
MYTH: People who get voluntary drug or alcohol treatment would be prohibited from possessing guns.
FACT: Again, current BATFE regulations make clear that voluntary commitments do not affect a person’s right to arms. NRA (and, surely, the medical community) would vehemently oppose any proposal that would punish or deter a person getting needed voluntary treatment.
MYTH: A Pennsylvania man lost his right to possess firearms due to an “offhanded, tongue-in-cheek remark.”
FACT: This case does not hold up to close investigation. The person made comments on a college campus that were interpreted as threatening in the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy; he was then briefly sent to a mental institution.
Opponents, however, have failed to mention that the man had been the subject of chronic complaints from his neighbors. (The “filth, mold, [and] mildew” in his apartment were so bad that the town declared it unfit for human habitation.) After his brief hospital stay, he was arrested for previously pointing a gun at his landlord and wiretapping his neighbors.
Despite these facts, it also appears he was only committed for a brief period of observation. Current BATFE regulations say that the term “committed to a mental institution” “does not include a person in a mental institution for observation.” Therefore, even in this extreme case, the person may not ultimately be prohibited from possessing firearms. Second Amendment scholar Clayton Cramer describes this case in a recent Shotgun News column (available online at http://www.claytoncramer.com/PopularMagazines/HR%202640.htm) and reaches the same conclusion.
MYTH: “Relief from disability” provisions would require gun owners to spend a fortune in legal fees to win restoration of rights.
FACT: Relief programs are not that complicated. When BATFE (then just BATF) operated the relief from disabilities program, the application was a simple two-page form that a person could submit on his own behalf. The bureau approved about 60% of valid applications from 1981-91.
Pro-gun attorney Evan Nappen points out that the most extreme anti-gun groups now oppose H.R. 2640 simply because of the relief provisions. Nappen includes a sampling of their comments in his article on the bill (“Enough NRA Bashing”), available online at http://www.pgnh.org/enough_nra_bashing.
MYTH: The bill’s “relief from disability” provisions are useless because Congress has defunded the “relief” program.
FACT: The current ban on processing relief applications wouldn’t affect this bill. The appropriations rider (promoted in 1992 by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)) only restricts expenditures by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. H.R. 2640 requires relief programs to be set up and operated by agencies that make adjudications or commitments related to people’s mental health. BATFE doesn’t do that, but other agencies—especially the Veterans’ Administration—do. Naturally, NRA would strongly oppose any effort to remove funding from new “relief” programs set up under this widely supported bill.
MYTH: The bill must be anti-gun, because it was co-sponsored by anti-gun Members of Congress.
FACT: By this unreasonable standard, any bill with broad support in Congress must be a bad idea. NRA believes in working with legislators of all political persuasions if the end result will benefit lawful gun owners. Anti-gun Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) supported arming airline pilots against terrorists, but that program was (and is) a good idea nonetheless.
MYTH: The bill “was hatched in secret …and passed out of the House without even a roll call.”
FACT: No one asked for a roll call vote. This is not unusual. The House voted on H.R. 2640 under “suspension of the rules,” which allows passing widely supported bills by a two-thirds vote. (This procedure also helps prevent amendments—which in this case helped prevent anti-gun legislators from turning the bill into a “Christmas tree” for their agenda.)
After a debate in which only one House member opposed the bill, the House passed the bill by a voice vote. There is never a recorded vote in the House without a request from a House member. No one asked for one on H.R. 2640, again showing the widespread support for the bill.
National Gathering Of Conservatives To Feature NRA Grassroots Seminar: Conservatives from around the country will convene in Reno, NV, October 11-13, for the 2007 "Conservative Leadership Conference" (CLC). In addition to the numerous training seminars and political discussions featuring some of the nation's most prominent political figures and movement leaders, NRA-ILA Grassroots Director Glen Caroline will be conducting a seminar titled: "Grassroots Lobbying: Turning Up The Heat." For more information on CLC '07 and to register, please visit http://www.clc07.com/.
Register To Vote For THIS YEAR’S Elections! With the 2007 election season in full swing in five states (Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Virginia), it is critical that gun owners and gun rights supporters register to vote in advance of state deadlines.
To assist you in registering to vote this year, NRA-ILA has a number of tools available. Please click here: www.nraila.org/ActionCenter/GetInvolvedLocally/VoterInformation.aspx?st and choose your state to find out all the voter registration dates, deadlines, and requirements for this year's elections. Click here: https://ssl.capwiz.com/nra/e4/nvra/?action=formhere to print a voter registration application that you can complete and return by mail, please. You may also obtain voter registration information by calling the ILA Grassroots Division at (800) 392-VOTE (8683).
Let’s make sure that we in the pro-Second Amendment community do all we can in registering to vote and voting this year!
STATE ROUNDUP (please click to see any updates on states not listed below.)
CALIFORNIA: Lead Ammunition Ban Sent to Governor’s Desk! On Thursday, September 6, the Assembly passed Assembly Bill 821, which would ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting in areas occupied by California condors. The bill is now on its way to the desk of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) for his consideration. This ban would have disastrous repercussions for California’s rich hunting tradition. Please contact Governor Schwarzenegger and respectfully urge him to protect hunting across the Golden State by vetoing AB 821. Governor Schwarzenegger can be reached by phone at 916-445-2841, fax at 916-445-4633, or visit http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email to send him an email.
Microstamping Legislation Heads to Governor’s Desk! The California Assembly voted 43-29 to pass Assembly Bill 1471 on Monday, September 10. The bill now moves to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s (R) desk for his consideration. This legislation requires that after a certain date, the make, model, and serial number of the firearm be microstamped onto the interior surface or internal working parts of all new handguns in such a manner that those identifiers are imprinted onto the cartridge case upon firing. Under AB1471, the manufacture, sale, and transfer of new handguns that do not include their identifying information would be a crime. Please contact the Governor and respectfully urge him to veto AB1471. Governor Schwarzenegger can be reached by phone at (916) 445-2841, fax at (916) 445-4633, or visit http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email to send him an email.
Emergency Powers Bill Passes Senate, Heads to Governor! By a vote of 21-16, the California Senate passed Assembly Bill 1645 on Wednesday, September 5. AB1645 will protect law-abiding gun owners during a declared state of emergency from the seizure or confiscation of any lawfully carried or possessed firearm or ammunition. The bill is now on its way to the desk of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) for his consideration.
MINNESOTA: The Republican National Lawyers Association, the William Mitchell Democrats, and the Federalist Society will hold “A Community Forum on Gun Rights: an Open Discussion on Minnesota’s Conceal & Carry Law” on October 15, from 6:00-8:00 p.m. This debate will be held at the William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul Minnesota. The forum will involve Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University, attorney David Lillehaug, Mr. John Caile, Mr. John Monson, and former state senator Wes Skoglund having a fair and open discussion regarding Minnesota’s concealed carry law. The moderator will be William Mitchell Professor, Mike Steenson. An informal reception will follow in the Auditorium. For more information, please contact Lars Loberg by phone at (651) 216-3886, or by email at [email protected].
MISSOURI: Kansas City Mayor Falls into Bloomberg’s Anti-Freedom Web! In a recent newsletter, Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser has signaled that he intends to join New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s foolish anti-gun crusade, “Mayors Against Illegal Guns.” Mayor Funkhouser has blindly fallen victim to the same lies and rhetoric as other mayors in America and is denouncing the Shelby-Tiahrt Amendment, crucial legislation supported by well-respected law enforcement groups such as the National Fraternal Order of Police, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the U.S. Department of Justice. Please contact Mayor Funkhouser and encourage him to put sound policy ahead of politics and reconsider his decision to join Mayor Bloomberg’s ill-advised coalition. Please click here for information on how to contact the Mayor.
NEVADA: New Right-to-Carry Reform Law Goes into Effect! On Monday, October 1, Senate Bill 237 went into effect. SB 237 will permit out of state permit holders to carry firearms for self-defense in Nevada if their state permit standards are substantially similar to Nevada’s and the issuing state has a 24-hour accessible database. The Department of Public Safety has issued a statement announcing that permits from Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Utah will be recognized. For more information on Nevada's recognition process, please visit www.nvrepository.state.nv.us.
