If you lie on a background check

Should people be prosecuted for lying on a NICS background check?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 7 87.5%

  • No.

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
Stargazer said:
Why would any law-abiding citizen need to 'lie' on a background check?

Criminals already get their guns in other ways anyway. Duuuuhh.
Click to expand...

I think we should out gun enforcement laws the way we enforce immigration laws.

It is amazing as to which laws liberals have a hard on supporting and those they don't.
 
Stargazer said:
Why would any law-abiding citizen need to 'lie' on a background check?
Click to expand...

If you're a 'law-abiding' citizen, that implies you won't try to obtain a firearm when you know you've been restricted from doing so under federal law.

But if you're a felon, domestic abuser, dishonorable discharge, mentally ill, or have restraining order against you, and you attempt to obtain a firearm by lying about that on a background check, when the NICs background check comes back as 'do not sell' then you should arrested and charged. Or when it is later revealed that you lied, same thing, arrested and charged.

This is why it's so important the NICS database be updated every week with felons, wife abusers, restraining orders, and dishonorable discharges. States that do not comply should be penalized.

Criminals already get their guns in other ways anyway. Duuuuhh.
Click to expand...

Criminals get their guns by avoiding background checks or by lying and hoping that the NICS database has not been updated.

It's not even clear if the Military is reporting dishonorable discharges. They are not reporting mental illnesses treated in VA psych wards. Why not?

Dishonorable discharges should immediately trigger a letter to the person's local law enforcement and family, informing that federal law prohibits them from owning any gun of any type.
 
hazlnut said:
It's not even clear if the Military is reporting dishonorable discharges. They are not reporting mental illnesses treated in VA psych wards. Why not?
Click to expand...

Because being treated by the VA for mental issues isn't being mentally adjudicated. Again, you sure talk a lot about things you know nothing about.
 
Sinn Fein said:
Because being treated by the VA for mental issues isn't being mentally adjudicated. Again, you sure talk a lot about things you know nothing about.
Click to expand...

Depends. Here is the language on the form --

which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution? (See Instructions for Question 11.f.)
Click to expand...

Question 11.f. Adjudicated Mentally Defective: A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
(1) is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs. This term shall include: (1) a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and (2) Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility.
Click to expand...

**Voluntary commitment is commitment.

**Are military courts able to make this ruling?

And some states have laws extending the language to those who have been "hospitalized for" or "treated for" -- so in order to enforce their law accurately, they need accurate information.

So, it seems that it is you, that are talking out of your ass.

And per the President's executive orders today there is not federal law preventing psychiatrists from reporting credible threats from patients to law enforcement. Law enforcement should be mandated to investigate reports from mental health professionals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top