Weekly News via Email
   Set as homepage | Add to favorites | Customer Service | Subscribe Now | Place an Ad | Contact Us | Sitemap Thursday, 08.21.2014
Classifieds
News Archive
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
 1
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8
 9  10  11  12  13  14  15
 16  17  18  19  20  21  22
 23  24  25  26  27  28  29
 30  31
Online Extras
Site Services
Around Bend
Outdoor Fun
Travel Info
Shop Local




Members Of



Poll: Today's Live Poll
Email to a friend | Print this | PDF version | Comments (4 posted) 
  Blogger |   del.icio.us |   digg |   newsvine

Mar 07,2008
Denying guns to the mentally ill
by Lionel Van Deerlin

Despite recollections of Columbine and Virginia Tech, the orgy of violence in just two months warns us that 2008 may see the highest toll ever in school shootings. As recently as a dozen years ago, an American schoolroom surely was among the safest refuges we'd be likely to find.

Things have changed. And there are two organizations that, though claiming to speak for the rights of countless members, offer no reasonable proposals for dealing with school shootings. These are the incredibly Washington-wise and politically powerful National Rifle Association and its smaller, but often louder echo on firearms issues, Gun Owners of America. Incorporated in 1976 (as Gun Owners of California), the latter group faults the NRA for serving the interests of firearms manufacturers more faithfully than it does an upright citizenry, which feels it must possess guns for sporting purposes.

And, oh yes - for self-protection. On these grounds, Gun Owners objected recently to a proposal even the outlaw John Dillinger might have thought reasonable. The provision would add mental health records to an FBI data base that's checked for information on people buying guns. Apparently with a straight face, Gun Owners of America argues that the new requirement "could block millions of additional, honest gun owners from buying firearms."

How's that? Is the organization's goal "Lugers for loonies?"

I'd have supposed that the records required on prospective gun purchasers already include most of what's needed in deciding whether they are fit to own a death-dealing weapon. But this, apparently, is not so. We're indebted to the Chicago Sun-Times for nailing essential facts concerning the disturbed 27-year-old who shot up a classroom at Northern Illinois University. Steve Kazmierczak, the newspaper learned, had acquired eight firearms without violation (by himself or anyone else) of laws that presumably protect society from guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them.

Although treated intermittently since his teen years for mental instability, Kazmierczak was able to buy three handguns from a licensed DeKalb, Ill., dealer in February 2007. He subsequently made three separate purchases at a shop in Champaign, seat of the University of Illinois. These included two 9 mm handguns, a .380-caliber pistol and a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun.

Quite an arsenal, this, for a young man who'd been diagnosed with mental problems. Only family members or close companions (whom the brooding Kazmierczak reportedly shunned) might have known he had stopped taking anti-anxiety and depression medications shortly before his Valentine's Day rampage.

Anyone questioning why gun control is a topic as yet unmentioned in the 2008 presidential campaign need only look to the past. It's not a winning political issue. This is so despite repeated outrages over the years that brand America the most violent among all developed nations - Christian, Jewish, Muslim or none of the above. Candidates showing courage to speak up on what could be the most urgent of all domestic issues have too often found themselves in cross-hairs of the firearms lobby.

Can the entire U.S. Senate be gutless? If in doubt, then consider the saga of Michael J. Sullivan. He's acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Sullivan hasn't yet won Senate confirmation, more than a year after President Bush named him to the job, because three senators stand in his way - Idaho's Michael D. Crapo and Larry Craig, along with David Vitter of Louisiana.

Of Crapo, I know nothing beyond the company he keeps. Vitter we remember as the self-proclaimed family man whose name graces the patron list of a notorious "D.C. madam." Craig, there seems reason to believe, gets his kicks in airport restrooms.

But the present fuss isn't about sexual indiscretions. Nor is it one of those partisan confrontations we've wearied of - Republicans and Democrats on opposite sides, neither giving an inch. No, this unpleasantness is about reducing gun violence, and it's an exclusively one-party rumble. A Republican president, Bush, picks a Republican prosecutor, Sullivan, to head a vitally important regulatory agency - and a trio of Republican senators puts a "hold" on the man's confirmation.

A "hold?" It's one of those Senate courtesies enabling individual members to block someone's confirmation without giving a reason. But every senator knows what this one is about. It's because Sullivan, a tough enforcement guy, thinks we need to know if a prospective gun buyer is sane - and we're denied the only means of finding out.

Is no one in authority raising hell about this? Not yet, it seems.

Van Deerlin represented a San Diego County district in Congress for 18 years.

2099 times read

Related news
Republicans block Bush nominee to ATF by UPI posted on Feb 15,2008

Gunning for parks by The San Diego Union-Tribune posted on Feb 29,2008

Guns here, guns there, guns everywhere by Lionel_Van_Deerlin posted on Apr 27,2007

Beyond rhetoric by The San Diego Union-Tribune posted on Mar 07,2008

US charges 19 with gun trafficking by Bend_Weekly_News_Sources posted on Mar 01,2007

Did you enjoy this article? Rating: 1.25 (total 20 votes)

  • The real problem is that until the Supreme Court takes the 2nd Amendment seriously, overturning state and local laws that prevent sane, trained private citizens from carrying handguns in the ready for shooting muggers and rapists -- we cannot trust the government to supervise the distribution of firearms. A government that does not recognize this right is a bigger threat than any handful of criminals and crazy people. Besides, if you don't think the threat of criminals and crazies is big enough to justify taking steps to defend yourself, then shut your pie hole and quit complaining about them.
  • (Posted on March 10, 2008, 11:13 pm fsilber)

  • Amazing. Did you also complain last year when Feinstein put a hold on gun rights legislation? I find your piece to be discriminatory and bigoted and insulting to the intelligence of the reader. FYI, the problem with Sullivan is that he has systematically led and organization that has trampled the civil rights of Americans as an apparent GOAL. When you have a department that has been dragged in front of and criticized in Congressional hearings, when you have that department being criticized in open court by the presiding judge for their prosecutorial practices, then there are clear problems with the admin. and Sullivan is at fault. If a physician committed numerous incidences of malpractice would you reward that MD with a promotion to chief of medicine? It's amazing that you people have a problem with listening to Osama B L's telephone calls or handing over a list of books withdrawn from a library but you are willing to have a rogue government agency create an enormous data base of American citizens containing their medical records and violating their privacy. How will you feel about it when your second grader is added to the list because he was prescribed Ritalin?
  • (Posted on March 10, 2008, 11:13 pm arhtur)

  • Could you perhaps define for readers what you mean by "the" mentally ill? I was not aware we were generic. "Is the organization's goal 'Lugers for loonies?' " is patently offensive, ask Jews and African Americans, and many others who have been similarly diminished. I would ask for apology, but I know it would not be forthcoming. Harold A. Maio --- Advisory Board, American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation --- Board Member, Partners in Crisis --- Former Consulting Editor, Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal --- Boston University, Language Consultant --- UPENN Collaborative on Community Integration of Individuals with Psychiatric Disabilities
  • (Posted on March 8, 2008, 8:18 am Harold A. Maio)

  • Loonies? How is that an acceptable word to use in a newspaper? Should we expect the "N" word next?
  • (Posted on March 8, 2008, 8:18 am Alison Hymes)

Market Information
Breaking News
Most Popular
Most Commented
Featured Columnist
Horoscope Guide
Aquarius Aquarius Libra Libra
Aries Aries Pisces Pisces
Cancer Cancer Sagittarius Sagittarius
Capricorn Capricorn Scorpio Scorpio
Gemini Gemini Taurus Taurus
Leo Leo Virgo Virgo
Local Attractions
Bend Visitors & Convention Bureau
Bend Visitors & Convention Bureau

Mt. Bachelor Resort
Mt. Bachelor Resort

Les Schwab Ampitheater
Les Schwab Ampitheater

Deschutes County Fairgrounds
Deschutes County
Fairgrounds

Tower Theatre
Tower Theatre

The High Desert Museum

Advertisements



Deschutes County

Google  
  Web    BendWeekly.com
© 2006 Bend Weekly News
A .Com Endeavors, Inc. Company.
All Rights Reserved. Terms under
which this service is provided to you.
Please read our Privacy Policy. Contact us.
Bend Weekly News & Event Guide Online
   Save the Net
Advertisement
External sites open in new window,
not endorsed by BendWeekly.com
Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Add to Google Add to MSN Add to My AOL
What are RSS headlines?