GUNS: Compromise? (Expanded Background Checks)

It’s a horserace that perhaps a site devoted to healthcare shouldn’t address, gun control, since, after all, we’re not hearing about SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) in the context of the bully pulpit being used by the President and the NRA regarding gun control. But we should be. WHEN background checks occur for gun purchases is far less relevant to most Americans than WHAT gets reported for the purpose of background checks if the President has his way.

Today, "compromise" is promised for expanded background checks that focuses on the circumstances of a gun sale, rather than WHAT WILL BE IN THE BACKGROUND CHECK. What’s the significance of this partial truth? Well, as in all the President’s legislation, the devil’s in the details. Remember no new income taxes? (He didn’t say no increase in payroll taxes!)

Today’s compromise is not addressing the sweeping changes that are likely to be pushed in WHAT gets reported, so that those who formerly might have cleared a background check regardless of the circumstances of a gun sale, will perhaps be ineligible under new reporting requirements.

NY State is on the cutting edge of the direction in which we’re headed. As part of its “Gun Control” legislation, NY provides for MANDATORY reporting of patients by clinicians who feel a particular patient “MIGHT” be dangerous.

Plain English, if your counselor or psychiatrist decides you might be dangerous, you’re getting reported. You might not find out you’ve been reported UNTIL you go to purchase a gun, but, be clear there is a record out there of YOUR mental health even if you NEVER attempt to purchase a gun.

It’s stunning that the NRA doesn’t latch onto the WHAT gets reported for background checks as opposed to WHEN such background checks are performed. The myopic argument of the NRA, as is typical with many of the issues presented by conservatives, omits the wider relevance and impact of proposed laws that could very well persuade others to join them in their fight against proposed legislation. In the face of increased reporting, who WOULD NOT think twice before seeking mental health help?

Based on the history of the President's rush to legislate, and with a collection of ill-thought-out legislation sold to the public using half-truths, it would be interesting to hear any media consider how, and to what extent mandatory reporting is going to be expanded for every citizen instead of honing in on what types of sales will require background checks.