Mental History Checks Needed Before Firearms Are Sold in the U.S.

Another year, another school shooting...

Sorry if it sounds crass, but doesn't this start to seem commonplace on an annual basis? Like we're simply expecting to hear about the next one. Last week, on Valentine's day, a former graduate of Northern Illinois University returned to his alma mater, and armed with a shotgun and handguns, proceeded to shoot students in a lecture hall. In total, this individual shot and killed five others before turning the gun on himself.

In the days ahead, internet forums and discussion groups were filled with renewed calls to ban firearms in the U.S. Guns are once again pointed out to be nothing more than a tool in which life can be extinguished.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - guns are not the problem here. Banning them won't solve any problems - schools like NIU were gun-free zones (so was Virginia Tech). Notice how these mass shooters gravitate towards places which are essentially gun-free? Schools, churches, shopping malls. Besides, you can look at countries like England, who, along with other parts of the U.K., have put a major squeeze on gun sales and the types of guns available (essentially banning them, even airguns) - there has been a noticeable rise in crime since these restrictions have been enacted. On the contrary, countries like Switzerland, whose citizens are armed more per capita than the U.S., have extremely low gun crime rates. But that is not the focus of this discussion and you can see my other blog entries for more info on this topic...

And no, I am not a flag-waving American gun nut, who cites the second amendment ad nauseum. Whatever your view on the second amendment, I find it difficult, even as a pro-gun guy, to believe that it is societally acceptable to sell guns to anyone, without a thorough suitable criminal background and more importantly, a mental history check performed first. The problem with some of these gun-loving Americans, is that they seem to favour individual rights over collective societal rights. So even a waiting period to get a gun license is considered an affront to their civil sensibilities. I personally, while I favour responsible gun ownership, have no issue with things such as a waiting period, as inconvenient as that would be for me. In Canada, you need to get a gun license, which involves a fairly detailed process, along with mandatory waiting periods for criminal and mental history checks - I have been through this and am glad this is in place - sure, it's a pain in the ass for me to have to wait, but I understand the reasoning behind it. Sure, one may be able to pass their Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) course and exams, and may have great references and such, but the government still does probe into your history a bit, and while it's conceivable that a person may get a gun license in Canada and still commit a crime later, the risk is far lessened, and if I were to hazard a guess, this is likely an exception, not the rule.

In this case, the Illinois shooter purchased his firearms legally a week or so before the campus shooting took place. From what I understand, he had a valid Illinois firearms license (not all states have such requirements, but Illinois does). So the anti-gun lobbyists may argue that even a firearms license may not work. Ah, but if you look at the last two prominent college campus shootings in the U.S., this one as well as Virginia Tech from last year, you'll see a bit of a parallel in the profiles of the shooters (I have decided to withhold their names to not afford them any more publicity). Both of these shooters, while having no previous criminal records, had documented cases of mental illness/depression, and in the case of the Illinois shooter, he was off his medication. Here's where probing a person's mental history would be of tremendous benefit, particularly before issuing the said person a firearm. The National Rifle Association (NRA) supports the release and use of this information before selling a gun to someone. Unfortunately, in most States, the extent of the background check would be for criminal activities and criminal records (and as we all know, criminals aren't necessarily law abiding citizens and as such, are unlikely to procure their guns legally anyway).

I think it's fairly obvious why the mental check is so important. Clearly, anyone hellbent (or even casually or seriously considering) on destroying human life via a shooting massacre is not playing with a full deck of cards. How they are ever issued either a firearms license or sold a firearm, is beyond me.

I find it laughable that in the initial reaction to the shooting, those close to the shooter and those who have known the shooter seemed so shocked that he did it. After all, he was supposedly a smart guy (which he would have been to have fooled so many people). He was a teacher's assistant, and was involved in developing some ideas on justice programs. Those around him used words like "revere" in describing him. Give me a freaking break...

If you recall, I wrote a blog entry last year about people living a life facade. Nothing surprises me anymore, and I have learned over time not to believe anything that I see. In this case even his teary-eyed girlfriend, who has known about his turbulent past and his needing to be medicated, is still somehow shocked that he was capable of doing this. Lady, the guy had mental problems - his profile should make him the prime candidate, not an after-thought! I've met a few people in my life who were really nice people, but you just saw signs that they had some mental issues. While under control, great, but if a person willingly goes off medication or pulls a fast one on someone and manages to acquire a firearm, look out. Being able to weed these people out (and whether you call it discriminatory or people profiling, I don't really care - for the societal good, some inconveniences are worth committing) will ensure that they don't have easy access to a gun license or firearm. Sure, they may still be able to acquire one, but it will be inevitably more difficult to do so. Like I said, anyone who is willing to turn a firearm on an innocent, unarmed group of human beings clearly has mental and emotional issues.