Reno-era policy kept Jared Loughner off FBI gun list

[RamboLiberal]

An old policy memo from the Clinton administration paved the way for accused Arizona gunman Jared Loughner to buy his first firearm.

Put in place by then-Attorney General Janet Reno, the policy prohibited the military from reporting certain drug abusers to the FBI, which manages the national list of prohibited gun-buyers, federal officials said.

Loughner attempted to enlist in the Army in December 2008 but was rejected because he failed a drug-screening process, Army officials said. Within a year, Loughner bought a Harrington & Richardson shotgun from Sportsman's Warehouse in Tucson.

-----

Federal law since 1968 has prohibited gun sales to anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. Licensed dealers have been required to check the backgrounds of gun-buyers since 1994. But the Reno policy told federal agencies not to report people who had voluntarily given drug tests for fear it would deter them from seeking treatment, federal officials said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/18/AR2011011804524.html?hpid=topnews

So which rights do we give up? Drugs are illegal. So do drug users give up their right to privacy when they are tested and be reported to one agency of government by another agency of government to help ensure the public safety so people like Loughner can't pass the NICS?

[AtheistCrusader]

1. Parents also appear to have enabled his purchase.

After all, he had no job. How did he afford a very expensive pistol?

Something stinks here.

[safeinOhio]

2. I would think his

interaction with local police at his JC would have been a better indicator of future behavior with firearms. Not that every interaction with LEO should disqualify an individual. However, it could force a person with erratic behavior to go thru some kind of psychological test to qualify under NICS.

[shadowrider]

3. What if his only interaction is petty mischief before he goes off?

Is that reason to force someone to undergo some kind of phychological test?

[safeinOhio]

4. No, escorted out by LEO

with a request of a psych evaluation to return to a school, might be. Even a clerk at Walmart was able to diagnosis some mental pathology going on and refused sale of bullets.

[shadowrider]

5. I can see it now

"Son, you have to undergo a psych eval before you can return to school because you're involved in petty mischief. However, the system is completely backed up due to the large number of people we're referring. You can return to school but you're on probation until your hearing in 7 months."

[pipoman]

7. This is a better solution IMO

The only thing I would add is a free psych eval paid for by the state who, in return for payment, is given authority to receive results and disclose results to NICS.

[shadowrider]

9. While I don't discount the value of this, a couple of points

1) Government CANNOT be trusted to keep information confidental. Somehow, some way, it'll be "accidentally leaked". Happens all the time.
2) Would anti's support a suspension of civil rights and allow someone to be referred for a psych eval with no probable cause? (I'm not talking about the kid who has had serious encounters with the police, but those who are really just up to mischief).

[one-eyed fat man]

10. It need not be accidental

"Government CANNOT be trusted to keep information confidental. Somehow, some way, it'll be "accidentally leaked". Happens all the time."

AR600-110 provides screening for all soldiers for HIV annually during their birth month. Any soldier who tests positive is ineligible for deployment overseas. Any soldier who is overseas and tests positive is immediately returned to the CONUS.

Soldiers confirmed as HIV-positive in CONUS will be indefinitely stabilized at their current duty station. They will be awarded an AEA code of "B" without a termination date.

The U.S. Army Special Operations Command and Ranger organizations are totally closed to HIV-positive soldiers. Infantry and Armor soldiers are reclassified to other MOS's.

It is prohibited to reveal that a soldier has screened positive for HIV.

However, as soon a soldier is removed from overseas orders and indefinitely stabilized at their current duty station everyone pretty much figures out why they were flagged. The First Sergeant does not have to stand in front of the morning formation and say, "Everyone who passed their HIV test take one step forward...... ah, ah, not you, Jones."

[DonP]

11. Why not treat an LEO concern the way we treat a TRO?

Temporary Restraining Orders show up when they run the NICS check. Once they are voided or expire, they are pulled from the system.

Why can't the police put a temporary Psych hold on individuals in the same way, until they get an evaluation that clears them, they are a no on the NICS check?

What am I missing?

[safeinOhio]

13. You have missed nothing.

Great idea.

[shadowrider]

18. Excellent idea

But would it pass muster with those so concerned the individual may have his civil rights violated without cause? Methinks many, many would object.

But an excellent idea nonetheless.

[SteveM]

20. I share your concerns as well, though some form of due-process is used...

The most disturbing thing about Form 4473 is the singling out of "marijuana." Too me, this indicates the hysteria of drug prohibitionists and all the policies which flowed therefrom. Reno felt reporting use would discourage treatment. While there are a few folks who should get counseling about pot use, ginning-up the substance to the level of "treatment" is a little farcical. As farcical as listing marijuana when meth, cocaine, Heroin, etc. are out there, not to mention the Big Daddy: booze. Prohibitionism results in strange bedfellows.

[X_Digger]

14. Actually, it appears that he just walked away from the first wal-mart.

Having had to wait 30 minutes for some guy to find the right key to open the ammo cage, that seems more likely.

[safeinOhio]

17. OH,

30 minute waiting period?
:rofl:

[pipoman]

6. His pot use had nothing to do with his actions IMHO

Would it have stopped this one buyer? Maybe. Our last 3 or 4 presidents have admitted to smoking pot. Are they going on the NICS list too? What happens in 5 or 10 years when every state has decriminalized pot, or the country changes the failed drug policy legalizing pot? Will there be thousands still on this list? Almost all people who try to enlist are 17 to 25. How long should they be on this list for having smoked some pot when they were 17-25? No, I don't think this is a good policy.

[one-eyed fat man]

8. Working in aviation

Unannounced random drug tests are routine in the aviation industry. Refusal to take the test is grounds for dismissal. A positive drug test is grounds for the revocation of every FAA airman's certificate held and a lifetime ban from the industry.

Even dopers are reluctant to fly on airplanes piloted and/or maintained by potheads.

Additionally, the Janet Reno memo reinforces the privacy requirements of HIPPA. The Army is prohibited from revealing the results of a medical test or screening.

It is ironic that someone stupid enough to show up for a drug test they knew WEEKS in advance they were going to undergo and STILL fail, had the presence of mind to lie answering the question on the Form 4473 when buying a gun.

Form 4473, question 11,(e):

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

[RSillsbee]

12. Which Reno are we talking about?

Marcus or Janet?

[slackmaster]

16. 911

[slackmaster]

15. Key word "is"

Present tense. Having used illegal drugs in the past does not legally disqualify someone from buying a gun.

[one-eyed fat man]

19. Maybe some clarification is needed.

"Not since breakfast, Dude. Got any Skittles?" probably shouldn't count "past" use.