Lemmings!!

[Ridgeratt]

States are letting people ban themselves from owning a gun
by: Zaid Jilani, Nexstar Media Wire

Posted: Dec 10, 2022 / 07:24 PM EST

Updated: Dec 10, 2022 / 07:24 PM EST

SHARE
(NewsNation) — "In Washington state, you can ask the state to deny you the right to buy a firearm."

This first-of-its-kind law was the brainchild of Democrat state Sen. Jamie Pedersen. Several years ago, a pair of law professors approached him with the idea of allowing people to voluntarily give up their gun rights.

Gun laws pushing voters on both sides to ballot boxes
“Their basic pitch was, ‘Hey, if you give people the power to do this then folks who know that they are suffering from some sort of mental illness…. when they have a break, do harm to themselves would be empowered to prevent that by getting firearms away from them in advance,” he said.


The law — passed in 2018 — allows residents to submit a short form to their county clerk’s office in any county in the state. If they change their mind, they have to wait seven days before the county can revoke it.

Pedersen called it a valuable tool that can help prevent tragedies without outside coercion.

“It’s a libertarian kind of tool, right? It’s an option that’s available for people. So there’s nothing particularly oppressive about it,” he said.


These laws stand in contrast to “red flag laws,” where a court can step in and take away someone’s gun rights if they are viewed as a risk.

Top 10 housing markets expected to grow significantly in 2023
However, the law may be so obscure that few people have used it. Pedersen said that as of a year ago, there were just 20 waivers in the system statewide. To put that in comparison, 864 people were killed by a firearm in the state in 2020, according to CDC statistics.

Still, the idea is catching on. Since Washington passed its law, additional states such as Virginia and Utah have put similar measures into place.

“I thought it was a good proactive way for people who had mental health problems or suicidal ideations can take some sort of proactive steps to prevent themselves from making some rash decisions if they were having problems controlling their meds or might have a relapse of their illness,” said Virginia state Sen. Scott Surovell, who helped author the law in his state.


Like in Washington state, few people have taken advantage of the law. Surovell estimated that last year between 30 and 40 people took advantage of the “do not sell” list.

One reason the laws may not be reaching many people is because of a lack of public awareness.

It’s thunder. It’s snow. It’s … thundersnow?
“I think one of the big, probably the biggest issue is that people aren’t even aware that it exists,” Pedersen said.

Pedersen acknowledges shortcomings in the law’s current implementation and wants to make changes in the future. He noted, for instance, the fact that the law includes no penalty, which prevents the FBI from keeping the prohibited person in the national instant background check system.


One proposal he’s thinking about is making it a civil infraction to violate the waiver.

Second, Pedersen wants to expand public knowledge about the law.

“We’re also planning to add language that would actually encourage mental health professionals to talk with their patients about the availability of the voluntary waiver,” he said.

To Surovell, the Virginia state senator, the positive feedback he’s received is evidence that the law was needed.


“A lot of people don’t identify very well with people who’ve been through suicidal ideation…so it’s hard for a lot people to understand. But the people who’ve been through it, a lot of them have thanked me for putting it in,” Surovell said.


https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/states-are-letting-people-ban-themselves-from-owning-a-gun/

[Lincoln4]

I believe my God gives us our rights, they believe their god give them theirs...

[pianoman9701]

These are the people I want to see disarmed. It'll make things easier later.

[Ridgeratt]

The time I spent in the navy back in the 70's didn't allow me to own a weapon.
It "Entitled Me" to own it.

[Seabass]

Sounds like a great way to disarm a generation of people before their brains finish developing…lots of naive college kids out there who would do something dumb like this.

[Ridgeratt]

Know a person who inherited their fathers guns, but he was not interested in them.  So he turned them into the Spokane Police Dept.

[hughjorgan]

What exactly is the problem if an individual is mentally ill and wants to do this? Fine by me, less of a chance they shoot themselves or god forbid try to harm others.

I doubt many will use it though.

[baldopepper]

What exactly is the problem if an individual is mentally ill and wants to do this? Fine by me, less ochance they shoot themselves or god forbid try to harm others.

I doubt many will use it though.

For many of us who are very close to someone who is mentally ill, especially high level bipolars, this law certainly has merits.  One day they are fairly normal and the next they can be be very effected. Someone very close to me has requested that I keep all of my guns secured because he does not trust himself on those episodic days.  Unless you are around someone like this, and have seen the problem it's a good idea to not be so judgemental.

[Hilltop123]

Oh I totally understand this! I banned myself from being homosexual, for decades.

[boneaddict]

Is there a contest in government to see who can be the stupidest?

[timberfaller]

If its only one thing this pandemic proved, ITS their a lot of SHEEP in this country!!  To dumb to see the Judas Goat leading them!!!

[Bullkllr]

Seems like a bit of a Catch-22 situation 

[PsoasHunter]

Seems like it doesn't harm anyone and may save a person's life that is dealing with suicidal thoughts or mental illness. How is this a bad thing?  Maybe I'm missing something? Or maybe OP is?   

[follow maggie]

What are the chances of getting yourself off the list without spending piles of money on lawyers, doctors & court? Facetious question, I know the answer.

[PsoasHunter]

From the article " If they change their mind, they have to wait seven days before the county can revoke it." Revoking it takes filling out a form and showing ID. 

[JimmyHoffa]

What are the chances of getting yourself off the list without spending piles of money on lawyers, doctors & court? Facetious question, I know the answer.

That is my concern.  Young individuals may want to be on the list because it's trendy or they want to get with some girl.  Then a few years later they have a little more sense and now want to buy a gun for whatever reason.  But the list and the removal process will be daunting enough to give up and do some other activity.

[Jake Dogfish]

This is a great program and should be expanded to driving as well.

[Lucky1]

Our esteemed legislators passing useless laws to make themselves feel good and look like they are doing something. We should give them two weeks every year to pass laws. And that is it, no extensions. We have enough laws.

[follow maggie]

From the article " If they change their mind, they have to wait seven days before the county can revoke it." Revoking it takes filling out a form and showing ID. 

I’m skeptical. If the people in Olympia see a way to keep people from buying guns, they’ll do it.

[Ridgeratt]

I wonder how many people will be manipulated when they are grieving. A smooth-talking health worker. Just sign this it's only temporary.


Ever hear the term "I'm from the government and here to help"

[idaho guy]

I wonder how  many people will be manipulated when they are grieving. A smooth-talking health worker. Just sign this it's only temporary.


Ever hear the term "I'm from the government and here to help"

   



Agree. They will eventually find a way to make it super difficult to get off the list. Would probably be used against the individual in a red flag situation as well. I guarantee some “ woke” man bun kid will do it to display his virtue and never be able to own a gun again. Or at least it will be very difficult. It sounds good in the political explanation-it always sounds better when it’s presented by politicians. It’s absurd that they are actually getting people to voluntarily give away their rights. I understand the mental health issues with people I am close to as well. The bottom line is they are using that situation to make it sound like a good idea. It is not

[acrim]

Somehow I can't keep from thinking this "List" of self restricting persons is merely a thin veil on a larger goal.   It is unlawful to retain a "List" of firearms owners , but there must be a list that will need to be cross checked for the self restricted...

Congratulations , your not on That list , but now you are on the Other list.

Now the state has a ready made list of what you purchased , and who purchased it , bypassing any ATF requests for non-searchable firearms transactions history.

[Angry Perch]

It's been a law for 4 years. Has anyone heard of anything bad happening?

[NRA4LIFE]

Yes!  Certain people getting agitated over nothing.

[Lucky1]

It's been a law for 4 years. Has anyone heard of anything bad happening?

Not me. If someone was denied when they tried to get their gun rights back, I don’t think it would probably make the news. And if it did it wouldn’t be a very big story, so most of us wouldn’t hear about it.
I’m thinking of you don’t trust yourself to not go buy a gun, get a accountability partner who is of sound mind. Problem solved.

[Chesapeake]

That article is weird as heck, it’s like a musical just jumping into some odd description of unrelated crap here and there, and and then right back into the article.

The talk of making it a civil infraction to violate the terms of the list.
Some college kid will join the list and then 10 years later after having forgot about it will try to buy a gun for self protection and get an infraction.

It sounds good on paper, but will mentally I’ll folks join the list? Have any done so since inception or are the 20 odd people on the list not of the group the list is claiming to be intended for? And one step deeper, will any mentally ill folks who are likely to use guns
in a negative fashion volunteer for the list?

Will they add another question to the 4473? They could put it right by the “have you ever renounced you US citizenship?” one and ask “have you ever voluntarily waived you second amendment rights?”

I don’t see why they should stop folks from giving up their rights, but I also can’t understand why a sane person would ever consider doing so.

[pianoman9701]

.