Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


VTech Fallout: Federal Cho Seung-Hui CYA?

posted at 2:16 pm on May 29, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

I geniunely don’t quite know what to make of this. It could be nothing, could be something. The BATF today fax blasted gun dealers around the country with an open letter regarding the Virginia Tech killer, Cho Seung-Hui, and his successful purchases of the firearms used in the massacre. The ATF letter’s aim is to inform dealers that it’s unlawful to sell guns to persons who have been adjudicated mentally defective, as Cho had. Here’s the letter, click on the images to see them full scale.

ATF letter page 1

ATF Cho letter page 2

Here’s the relevant passage as to Cho and his status, and a future remedy on the part of ATF:

ATF Cho quote

Cho, according to his Wikipedia page, should not have been able to purchase firearms:

Because Cho was not involuntarily committed to a mental health facility as an inpatient, he was still legally eligible to buy guns under Virginia law. However, according to Virginia law, “A magistrate has the authority to issue a detention order upon a finding that a person is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization or treatment.” The magistrate also must find that the person is an imminent danger to himself or others. Virginia officials and other law experts have argued that, under United States federal law, Justice Barnett’s order meant that Cho had been “adjudicated as a mental defective” and was thus ineligible to purchase firearms under federal law.

But the way I understand how the background check system works, the dealer checks with the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), and if it discovers that the intended buyer either has a criminal background or has been found mentally ill enough to be a threat, then the NICS will tell the dealer to disallow the sale. That apparently did not happen in Cho’s case.

The ATF letter says that it’s going to re-work the ATF Form 4473, which gun buyers fill out in order to buy a gun, and which asks buyers if they have a criminal background or have been found mentally ill, etc. No clarification will stop them from lying on a 4473, as Cho evidently did. So it will still be up to the NICS to find and stop criminals and the mentally ill from buying a gun. And from the looks of things, it was NICS and not any local dealer that failed to stop Cho.

The evident point of the ATF letter is to remind local dealers of their responsibility to keep dangerous people like Cho from obtaining firearms. But the evidence suggests that the failure was at the federal NICS level. If that’s the case, then the open letter looks like a CYA move to me. But I’m open to other interpretations. It would be good to hear from Virginia gun dealers on this. If we have any reading the site, email me at bryan — at — hotair — dot — com.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

Plus, as I understand it, the HIPAA laws prevent the information from being available also.
The wall between the info and its effective use is too high IMHO.

bbz123 on May 29, 2007 at 2:27 PM

Having a low-level FFL (Type 3, Curios & Relics) I got a copy of this letter the other day.

From my reading of it, it’s pretty much CYA and a head’s up that they’re going to change the form. For those who’ve never filled one out, there’s a set of 12 (13?) questions that you answer Yes or No to. Hint: there is one you say Yes to, the rest should all be NO. I expect that they’ll put the question about “Are you a nutcase?” in a bigger box with more text explaining how you really, really shouldn’t lie on this one, and that you should say YES even if the voices are telling you not to.

Which, of course, will absolutely stop anyone from lying when they fill out the form so we’ll never have another such incident.

KCSteve on May 29, 2007 at 2:32 PM

Here’s a link to the FFL Q&A Sheet, Scroll down to see the form. I to have a feeling this is going to change since most states are getting rid of the PTA(Permit to Acquire).
Question f. is the one in question.
http://www.ocshooters.com/Gen/Form-4473/ATF-Form-4473.htm

KCtheKat on May 29, 2007 at 2:41 PM

Plus, as I understand it, the HIPAA laws prevent the information from being available also

That is where the change needs to be made. I appreciate doctor/patient privelege, but I doubt many rational people would be against this measure. This doesn’t give gun dealers access to medical records, it could be a simple yes/no to the question of previous mental illness.

natesnake on May 29, 2007 at 2:51 PM

Yeah, it doesn’t make much sense. The dealer doesn’t head downtown to personally pore through someone’s background records.

But at the mental health level, even apart from any HIPAA rules, the NICS is totally reliant on the doctors/hospitals getting around to submitting paperwork saying that someone’s nuts, and then someone else receiving the paperwork and entering the information into the NICS computers. I wonder if they’re doing anything to shore up that side of it?

Tanya on May 29, 2007 at 2:57 PM

I geniunely don’t quite know what to make of this.

What this means is that, untill the BATF can figure out a way to inform gun dealers of a persons private medical background, gun dealers are required to have Extra Sensory Perception to determine the mental health of any given gun buyer.

Lawrence on May 29, 2007 at 3:02 PM

The failure is certainly at the federal level. HIPAA prevents anyone from knowing about a person’s mental status.

By liberal logic, the only thing to do is grab more “evil” guns. That is easier than facing up to the responsibility of God-given rights.

Valiant on May 29, 2007 at 3:25 PM

What this means is that, untill the BATF can figure out a way to inform gun dealers of a persons private medical background, gun dealers are required to have Extra Sensory Perception to determine the mental health of any given gun buyer.

Lawrence on May 29, 2007 at 3:02 PM

That’s pretty much what I thought. Thanks for clearing it up!

Bryan on May 29, 2007 at 3:28 PM

The system is still in the works if you ask me. I think that there is true effort not to step on the the second amendment. But there is still cobwebs in the system though it has gotten better. I don’t understand why a dealer gets a “delay” and after “no response” and three business days the dealer can release “if there is no reason not to”-translates it’s up to the dealer. Then in some of these “Delay” cases Nics will call back a month later and say it’s a “denial” (guy should have never gotten a gun) and they will want to know the person’s address that was denied. That really perplexes me.

Drtuddle on May 29, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Cho was not actualy deemed a threat to his own safety or anyone elses by the judge, he WAS ordered to a mental facility but the “danger” box on the form was not checked, the judge did not think he was dangerous just needed help.

I don’t necessarily think it is a case of BATFE playing CYA, I think they are trying to clarify a vague and confusing question on the 4473 and it appears that the question will be simplified on future revisions of the 4473. Many times I have had to explain “adjudicated” to a potential buyer!

The fault lies with VA not finding him dangerous and not giving that info to the NICS for their files. Apparently a LOT of states only transfer criminal history to NICS and not mental
-SR Sblammo

Drtuddle on May 29, 2007 at 5:32 PM

Can anyone tell me of any mental illness Cho was actually diagnosed with by a mental health professional prior to his suicidal rampage? I’m not aware of any diagnosis made beforehand to enable a ban in Cho’s case.

Buck Turgidson on May 29, 2007 at 5:34 PM

Smoking Gun has six pages of mental health documents on him.

Tanya on May 29, 2007 at 5:46 PM

You can’t ask about anyones mental health when you hire them, and you can’t sell them a gun if they have mental health problems, but you hire them to sell guns because you can’t ask about mental health.
I’m confused.

right2bright on May 29, 2007 at 5:47 PM

It would be good to hear from Virginia gun dealers on this.

Yeah I would like to know why a “check” is considered an acceptable form of identification in Virginia. I’m assuming it is an acceptable only with other forms of ID not by itself? Don’t criminals make their own scam checks on their home computer?

Drtuddle on May 29, 2007 at 5:51 PM

Was the “check” supplemental proof of residency? Because a “check” is not suggested anywhere in the instructions for proof of 90 days residency on the 4473 federal form. Only Leases and electric bills, water bills that match the the name and address of his identification are suggested.

Drtuddle on May 29, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Smoking Gun has six pages of mental health documents on him.

Tanya on May 29, 2007 at 5:46 PM

Thanks Tanya. Interesting stuff. Still no diagnosis beyond mentally ill. Mentally ill how doctor? Afterward we filled up threads about his schizophrenia, but we can’t diagnose. You can’t stop a gun sale without more than,”he seems a little crazy”. I’m no doctor, but I can read the DSM 5, or whatever number it’s up to. I think they pegged him as depressed and potentially suicidal. It would be nice if that could stop a gun sale. Based on the investigation, has a posthumous expert conclusion been reached? Is that possible? He passed for normal with his dorm-mates.

Buck Turgidson on May 29, 2007 at 10:52 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.