Opinion: Time to keep weapons away from the mentally ill
By Ted Gaines
Inspired by the tragic events that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., on Dec. 18. I announced legislative plans to introduce a bill that would make a critical change to California’s existing gun control laws, keeping dangerous firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill.
It’s time to take a hard look at gun violence in America and California. As a father of six children and a legislator, I am sickened by the recent events in Connecticut. While there is no single solution to completely preventing this kind of horrific crime, I believe this bill is an important step in protecting our children and anyone who is at risk from the dangerously mentally ill.
Ted Gaines
Current California law prevents anyone who has been judged by a court to be a danger to others due to a mental disorder or mental illness, or has been judged a mentally disordered sex offender, from owning or possessing a firearm. However, upon completion of treatment or at a later date the person can petition the court to issue a certificate saying they are approved to possess a firearm.
My bill will amend California law to permanently prohibit gun ownership for those people who met the conditions stated above. There would be no petitioning the courts for future firearm possession.
Although California has the toughest gun laws in the nation, there is a loophole that must be closed for those determined by a court to be dangerously mentally ill. I hope everyone with any mental illness gets the treatment and rehabilitation they need to live a healthy and productive life. But if the court has ruled you are a danger to others, that’s it. That is your one strike. We are not going to pave the way for you to own a firearm ever again.
Ted Gaines, R-Roseville, represents the 1st Senate District, which includes all or parts of Alpine, El Dorado, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, Shasta, Sierra and Siskiyou counties.
I think that a person that feels the need to purchase a Bushmaster should be judged by a court to be a danger to others due to a mental disorder or mental illness.
I’m not a Gaines constituent, nor would I ever be likely to support a Republican from Roseville. But somebody has to try to make some sense of gun control legislation, and it’s not going to be folks who have so little knowledge about, and even fear of, firearms that they wouldn’t know an assault weapon from a salt shaker.
Years ago I was briefly a member of NRA – I dropped my membership because, although I supported their basic premise, I couldn’t handle the political crazies who were gathered there.
But the NRA is right in one regard – folks who, unfortunately, didn’t grow up learning how to use firearms or, most likely, any other hand tools, are so anti-gun that they’ll likely support any nonsense, any misguided legislation, that will restrict gun owners while doing nothing to address the mentally disturbed folks who decide to kill – by whatever means are available.
Condemn it as a “gun culture” all you want. Living in Berkeley, Ca in the fifties, my parents bought me my first .22 rifle when I was 14. I learned to shoot in the Boy Scouts – my instructor was an Army captain under General Patton who pounded safety into my head far more effectively than I ever received in Air Force boot camp, Navy boot camp or law enforcement training. If we can identify one cultural change that’s drastically altered the so called “gun culture” in our country, it’s that young people do not, any longer, grow up understanding and respecting firearms.
Sadly, we probably can’t move our culture back to what it once was – a fact that has ramifications well beyond firearms. But we can take a look at the carnage our culture now seems to be producing and try to deal with the root causes instead of simplistically blaming the tools.
By introducing this bill, does Ted Gaines mean mentally ill people are currently able to get guns?
The short answer is yes. Unless someone has taken the time to have the individual identified by the courts as mental ill, they are illegible for a firearm. For example, my mother has Alzheimer’s but is still sufficiently functional she lives at home, but barely (we have taken her car keys away from for example). If she got it in her mind to buy a gun she could (not that would be rather scary), because we have not yet gone to court to have her deemed incapable. But her medical records would indicate the diagnosis – something that is not presently checked.
See below, pulled form State Attorney Generals website.
Under what conditions is someone considered ineligible to possess and/or purchase firearms?
Any person who has been convicted of a felony, certain misdemeanors, certain firearms offenses, who is addicted to narcotics, who is the subject of a domestic violence restraining order, or has been committed to a mental institution pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 8100, may not possess or have under his or her control any firearm. See Prohibiting Categories, pdf. Certain federal statutes impose lifetime and other more restrictive prohibitions on firearm possession. Additionally, certain statutory conditions exist that allow for the possession of firearms but preclude the acquisition or purchase of additional firearms, such as the subjects of certain restraining orders and those under state or federal indictment.