the gun-control lawsuit that isn't
Dec. 22nd, 2004 09:41 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearA family is suing walmart because the store sold a gun to their mentally-disturbed daughter who has a mental-health history and is on prescription drugs to control that which are purchased through the same walmart. That daughter killed herself with the weapon.
Some are concerned that its a "gun control" lawsuit. but it isn't. its a privacy rights lawsuit, and its directed at the wrong defendant.
The truth is that the lawyer who took on their case didn't do his homework. The restriction of mental-health records to the FBI is a Texas law (which 37 other states share), so the FBI had no way of having her name on the "don't sell a gun" list. The restriction of a store using its prescription records for *any* other purpose is a federal law passed in 1996. Walmart followed the law in both cases (well, by deferring to the FBI for the background check, and not looking up prescription records).
So Walmart was in no way at fault as they followed the law properly. Even an appeal can't redirect the issue to the laws in question because they aren't aimed at the right defendants, nor could either law be overturned on constitutional issues. Both would have to be changed through legislation.
And personally, I don't think they should be.
I do think there should be a way for parents or caregivers of mentally disturbed patients to at least be able to petition to the FBI to have the patient put on the "don't sell a gun to them" list,, allowing some restrictions without having to have full-disclosure of the private records. However, the FBI policy on this should be scrutinized carefully and personal interviews conducted to verify the claims of the guardians, lest it be subject to an NRA legal attack.
In the end, a suicide is a suicide, and regardless of how it was done, it likely would have happened anyways. Continual intervention is the only real way to stop it; if you leave a person alone who wants to die, they'll find a way.
Some are concerned that its a "gun control" lawsuit. but it isn't. its a privacy rights lawsuit, and its directed at the wrong defendant.
The truth is that the lawyer who took on their case didn't do his homework. The restriction of mental-health records to the FBI is a Texas law (which 37 other states share), so the FBI had no way of having her name on the "don't sell a gun" list. The restriction of a store using its prescription records for *any* other purpose is a federal law passed in 1996. Walmart followed the law in both cases (well, by deferring to the FBI for the background check, and not looking up prescription records).
So Walmart was in no way at fault as they followed the law properly. Even an appeal can't redirect the issue to the laws in question because they aren't aimed at the right defendants, nor could either law be overturned on constitutional issues. Both would have to be changed through legislation.
And personally, I don't think they should be.
I do think there should be a way for parents or caregivers of mentally disturbed patients to at least be able to petition to the FBI to have the patient put on the "don't sell a gun to them" list,, allowing some restrictions without having to have full-disclosure of the private records. However, the FBI policy on this should be scrutinized carefully and personal interviews conducted to verify the claims of the guardians, lest it be subject to an NRA legal attack.
In the end, a suicide is a suicide, and regardless of how it was done, it likely would have happened anyways. Continual intervention is the only real way to stop it; if you leave a person alone who wants to die, they'll find a way.
