Gun purchase glitch raises questions

[beevul]

Gun purchase glitch raises questions

Del.'s small-arms advocates shocked over DSP recordkeeping

By LEE WILLIAMS • The News Journal • October 28, 2008

Delaware State Police stopped Alvina Vansickle from purchasing a .22-caliber pistol for self-defense because she was too old and a woman, said Superintendent Col. Thomas MacLeish.

The outrage that followed led to the revelation that Delaware State Police had been keeping lists of gun buyers for years; state law requires them to destroy these records after 60 days.

Lawson said Nefosky told him he searched seven years of firearms transaction records to see if Vansickle had ever bought a gun before

"The info was in an electronic file that no one did anything with," MacLeish said. "We've since purged that file in its entirety.


http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20081028/NEWS01/810280392/1006/NEWS

"An electronic file that no one did anything with" - that we know of - except search through 7 years of it to see if an applicant had previously bought a firearm, and then deny her...because she was a woman, and too old.

Disgusting.

[leftofcool]

1. That is disgusting!

How old is too old to own a gun?

[Brucie Kibbutz]

2. You're never too old!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFVQYj_zk_M

[gorfle]

3. This is precisely why

This is precisely why I have long said that the current NICS system is, in effect, firearm registration.

I have no doubt that the database of NICS applicants is conveniently in an "electronic file that no one did anything with".

[ManiacJoe]

8. NICS checks do not contain any info about the gun

unless things have changed lately.

[slackmaster]

4. If they had denied her a driver's license because of age and gender

And not because of a measured physical inability to drive safely, this would be international news.

[iverglas]

6. huh

Where I'm at, any driver over the age of 80 has to be retested to ensure s/he meets all of the requirements for a licence.

As well, driver's licence applications commonly ask whether people have any medical condition that could affect their ability to drive. Suidical depression would be such a condition. Not that anybody is likely to report it. But just since we're comparing obtaining a driver's licence with obtaining a firearm.

A physician who diagnoses a condition that makes an individual unfit to drive is required to report it to the licensing authorities. The Canadian Medical Association publishes a guide:

http://www.cma.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/18223/la_id/1.htm

Section 7: Aging
7.1 Overview
7.2 Assessment
7.3 Specific assessment
7.3.1 Cognitive impairment
7.3.2 Multiple physical deficits
7.3.3 Dementia
7.4 Drugs
7.5 Driving cessation

Section 9: Psychiatric illness
9.1 Overview
9.2 Functional impairment
9.3 Assessing fitness to drive
9.4 Specific illnesses
9.4.1 Schizophrenia
9.4.2 Personality disorders
9.4.3 Depression and bipolar disorder
9.4.4 Anxiety disorders
9.4.5 Psychotic episodes
9.4.6 Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
9.4.7 Aggressive driving
9.5 Psychoactive drugs

Section 9
Psychiatric illness

Immediate contraindications to driving*:

• suicidal plan involving crashing a vehicle

But buying a gun? Hell. Step right up and pay yer money.

[iverglas]

5. oh, we're all just so outraged

"Apparently, they thought she might shoot herself with it," said J.R. Vansickle, 83. "She has a clean record. There was no reason to turn her down. I lost both legs through diabetes. I'm in a wheelchair. We're an elderly couple. She wanted the gun for self-defense in our home."

It is unusual for a person of that age to purchase a firearm when s/he has never had one before.

It is especially unusual for a woman of that age to purchase a firearm when s/he has never had one before.

The possibility that the woman was contemplating suicide (or possibly a murder-suicide, whether by pact or otherwise) was very real.

Where I'm at, of course, the woman would have had to apply for a licence before purchasing the firearm, and that sort of extremely obvious concern could have been investigated just as any other obvious red flag in an application for a licence can be.

An example of a study finding a correlation between elderly suicide rates and availability of firearms (comparing US states):

http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/9/7/6/4/pages97648/p97648-1.php

Page 5: "The elderly also use more lethal methods, predominantly firearms, in their suicide efforts, and thus complete a higher proportion of their attempts (Stack, 2000)."

Page 13: "The elderly employ firearms in their suicide attempts more thoroughly than do other age cohorts, so we examined aspects of the relative availability of firearms (primarily handguns) in a state. We created variable 9, a scale of state firearms availability, using the following criteria: 1) is a license or permit necessary for firearm purchase; 2) does a state limit the sale of “Saturday night specials;” 3) do the state police conduct an independent background check on firearms purchasers; 4) are background checks required at gun shows, 5) are background checks required for other forms of secondary purchase; 6) does the state mandate a waiting period; and 7) is safety training necessary. None of these steps would block many elderly persons from acquiring firearms, but they would serve to make the process more demanding."

Page 18: "The two (formerly three) new variables both exhibit statistically significant positive relations with elderly suicide rates, indicating that factors other than social integration (e.g., the availability of firearms) exert strong influences on the incidence of suicide among the elderly."

Page 20: "Fourth, a comparison of models 3 and 4 in Table 3 suggests that, while social integration —the focus of model 4—is clearly inversely related to suicide among the elderly, other factors distinct from social integration that appear in model 3—particularly firearms availability—have strong positive relations with elderly suicide. So indices of social integration hold no monopoly on explaining suicide among the elderly."


But who cares.

[Fattys Mom]

14. So do

You want to restrict the brown people from owning guns as well Iverglas?

[iverglas]

16. damn, I missed this little gem

If you're still around, "ask" me again. Since you evidently have no shame, you shouldn't have a problem doing that.

[machI]

7. This is just wrong on so many levels

Sex discrimination because she is a woman.

Age discrimination because she managed to live a long time.

Violation of a Constitutionally protected right on a purely arbitrary basis.

Plus, to top it off, a gun is just another piece of personal property and the Government does not need to know why a person is making a legal purchase of a legal piece of personal property.

When I was younger I bought many items at the local speed shop, that when properly installed in an automobile, could enable said automobile to vastly exceed the speed limit. Not a single time was I ever asked why I was buying high performance auto parts. Why should it be any different for buying a gun and ammunition?

Watch this case get settled out of court in short order.

[iverglas]

9. this is a "discussion" forum

The discussion was underway when you joined it. Or plonked your post into it.

Your claim:

Violation of a Constitutionally protected right on a purely arbitrary basis.

was already addressed by me.

Any reason you decided to ignore that fact?

This tactic works well in the real world, does it?

[tburnsten]

10. HA, you did address it didn't you?

In a totally ageist, sexist way, only talking about CANADIAN laws when she is a resident of DELAWARE, and acting as if people do not have a right to end their life when they feel good and ready to. I am not an advocate of suicide or anything, but your post acted as if the slightest possibility that a person may kill themself eventually is a perfectly good reason to deprive them of rights and privileges that they would otherwise be entitled to or meet the requirements of. Your little blurb about Canadian licenses was especially funny, as if denying someone their driver's license would somehow be a remotely effective way to stop them from committing suicide with a vehicle.

[machI]

11. Wye yes, it is a "discussion" forum

And I was responding to beevul, not iverglas.

Let me check my user's agreement for Democratic Underground.

...

Yep, no where in the user's agreement did I find a requirement to clear my posts in the topic forum 'GUNS' through iverglas first.

Violation of a Constitutionally protected right on a purely arbitrary basis.

was already addressed by me.

I don't think you did. I saw some flimsy justification about restricting a person, based on age, from operating a bus on public thoroughfares. This completely over looks the fact the person could drive a bus all they want to on private property. This completely over looks the fact the person could own a bus at any age, because the bus is a piece of private property.

And iverglas brings up the issue of suicide and then quickly links it to guns. I see this tactic used frequently. Iverglas is a master at finding an instance of misuse of guns, projecting this misuse onto a wide range of gun owners, then advocating limiting the rights of all gun owners based on the mere potential for misuse.

You see iverglas, where this goes awry is that in the United States, a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Iverglas' position is for gun owners to prove their innocence in order for the Government to grant them the privilege of owning a gun.

I believe in freedom, that is why I am voting Barack Obama for President of the United States.
Who are you voting for President?

[iverglas]

12. another fan for the club!

Iverglas is a master at finding an instance of misuse of guns, projecting this misuse onto a wide range of gun owners, then advocating limiting the rights of all gun owners based on the mere potential for misuse.

Gosh, you know me so ... uh ... well. We must have met. Maybe in another life?


And iverglas brings up the issue of suicide and then quickly links it to guns.

God damn, eh? Start right out with the false statements.

"The issue of suicide" was brought up by the authority that handled the request for clearance to purchase the firearm. Not by me.


You see iverglas, where this goes awry is that in the United States, a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

You see, whatever the hell your name is, this has precisely fuck all to do with the topic of discussion.

Children are not allowed to drive cars. What are they presumed to be guilty of? Is this that original sin stuff maybe?

Now, here you will be needing some of that reasoning by analogy stuff. Good luck with that. (Along with being unskilled at foreseeing consequences of actions, children tend not to do well with reasoning by analogy. Concrete thinking is also a common symptom of, oh, this and that. Just fyi.)


Yep, no where in the user's agreement did I find a requirement to clear my posts in the topic forum 'GUNS' through iverglas first.

If you'd like to invite the other party to whatever discussion you are engaged in to remove that invisibility cloak, I'm sure we'd all like to meet him/her. Maybe s/he could tell us what you're talking about.

Meanwhile, you could always dig out the user's manual for life, and how to behave therein.


fixed that html

[machI]

13. I am a member of the Fan Club of Personal Property Rights. Guns are only part of those rights.

Gosh, you know me so

iverglas posts 24000 times over the span of seven years and is not unknown.

"The issue of suicide"

Suicide is taken up by iverglas, demonstrated to be a documented misuse of guns, projects this potential misuse onto all gun owners and implies it is justification to restrict Mrs. Alvina Vansickle right to buy a gun. I see that you agree with me.

Children are not allowed to drive cars.

Children are not allowed to drive cars on public thoroughfares. Iverglas left out the part about drive cars on private property. That tactic is so noted once again.

here you will be needing some of that reasoning by analogy stuff.

I will leave the psychological reasoning stuff to the lawyers. I maintain my statements are true through induction.

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. Infringement of Constitutional rights due to 'safety concerns'

Unfortunately, the US has seen too much of this recently. Sad to see Duers defend this.

Sadder yet to see the reflexive deference to authority that accompanies this attitude.

[Indy Lurker]

17. They need to review current law, both state and constitutional

This is a case of the police making up the law as they go. I'm surprised they admitted to it. and didn't call it an "administrative error"

It also sounds like they are doing the right thing now.



Constitutional Law
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.


Delaware State law does not reject firearm purchases due to age or gender.

As to whether age and gender are included in the state statute as legitimate reasons to reject a firearms purchase, MacLeish stated, "No, they are not." Sgt. Benjamin Nefosky, heads the firearms approval unit.

[iverglas]

18. and the disingenuousness overfloweth

Delaware State law does not reject firearm purchases due to age or gender.

And of course we all know that these were not the reasons for the questions raised here.

The reason was the risk of suicide.

I'll bet that if an employer-based health insurance plan covers prenatal care for women, you people scream age and sex discrimination. After all, people under 10 / over 50, and men, wouldn't qualify.

[X_Digger]

19. And a person on the phone is qualified to determine mental status how?

Wow, we need more of these folks. If they can tell that someone's suicidal by merely taking down their vital information, they must be psychic.

Here's a summary of Deleware's laws concerning purchase and posession.

Minimum age for purchase:

* Purchasers of rifles and shotguns must be 18 years old.

* Handgun purchasers must be 21 years old.

The following persons are prohibited from purchasing or possessing any firearm, and these are the ONLY criteria that are checked:

* Convicted felons.

* Those convicted of a crime of violence involving bodily injury to another, including misdemeanors, but the prohibition shall not apply after five years from the date of conviction for misdemeanors.

* Those convicted of an offense involving a narcotic, dangerous drug, or controlled substance.

* Those who have ever been committed to a mental institution, sanitarium or hospital for mental disorder and do not possess a certificate of rehabilitation. (Delaware is one of the states that adds records of mental treatment to the state database that is checked during purchase.)

* Children under 16 years of age, unless under the direct supervision of an adult.

* A person adjudicated as delinquent for conduct which, if committed by an adult, would constitute a felony, unless and until that person has reached age 25.

Obviously Grandma didn't meet any of these criteria. Meh.