Schumer Pushes for Military to Report Applicants' Drug Use to Prevent Gun Purchases

[mvccd1000]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/schumer-says-loughners-drug-abuse-should-have-prevented-gun-purchase-.html

In the aftermath of the Tucson tragedy, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Sunday that the military should inform the FBI's national database when they reject someone for drug abuse, a move that he believes would have prevented Jared Loughner from buying a gun.

In a letter to the Obama administration, Schumer said the military should notify the FBI when someone is rejected for illegal drug use, something that the military is not currently required to do.

Now THERE'S sensible gun control we can all agree on. If someone admits to using illegal drugs, get the FBI involved. This one act will probably do more to prevent gun crime than any amount of restrictions on guns will ever do. (Since nearly all crimes, using a gun or not, involve drug use, it's a no-brainer!)

[hlthe2b]

1. You think reporting someone's marijuana use will

"do more to prevent gun crime than any amount of restrictions on guns will ever do?" Really?

[bluestateguy]

2. So somebody admits to smoking a hit of weed at a high school party and now they can't buy a gun

That's what would end of happening. A nice way to get more names in the computer too.

Gun control is racist and classist.

[hlthe2b]

3. Not to mention the average "Joe"

who borrows a dose of a prescription drug legally prescribed to a friend or family member to get some pain relief for a condition for which they can get no relief, having no health insurance--whether it be for pain relief or an antibiotic or similar. :shrug:

I certainly don't condone this practice, but would simply point out it is not uncommon and does not always suggest a "drug" problem. I say this knowing that if they were able to initiate this with the military (who obviously have health care access), they would attempt something similar among civilians.

[pnwmom]

14. The army doesn't bar applicants who admit to smoking pot as teens.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/arjobs/bl67y.htm


e) A soldier or potential enlistee will not be disqualified for teenage civilian experimentation with marijuana or other can nabinoids disclosed in voluntary confessions of dmg experimentation documented solely by information obtained from DD Form 1966, SF 88 or SF 93. (Experimentation is defined as one time use or casual use over a short period of time resulting from peer pressure.) The use disclosed must have occurred prior to the individual's 18th birthday, and prior to enlistment in any armed force.

[hlthe2b]

17. "Although drug use prior to entering the service is ...forbidden..."

Although drug use prior to entering the service is nominally forbidden, according to the Marine Corps Times, approximately one-third of Marines have received waivers for recreational marijuana use.

Read more: Marine Corps Career Requirements | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6578511_marine-corps-career-requirements.html#ixzz1BEOyl0lB

[pnwmom]

18. So they don't bar enlistees who smoked as teens,

and they give them waivers if they've smoked as adults.

[hlthe2b]

19. They do if not granted a waiver. Waivers are not automatic

[NaturalHigh]

4. Yeah, because all those potheads get violent when they get the munchies.

Do I even need to post the sarcasm thing?

[hlthe2b]

6. No pot use here, but don't you dare take my chocolate!

:evilgrin:

[NaturalHigh]

11. I'll stay away from your chocolate if you'll stay away from my coffee.

I honestly think I would have to go to rehab if they banned coffee.

[hlthe2b]

13. Oh, I'd have to join you there too.... So many 'vices', so little time..

[pnwmom]

16. We're not talking about all potheads.

Just the ones with guns in their hands.

[one-eyed fat man]

53. Working in aviation

Unannounced routine drug tests are routine in the aviation industry. A positive drug test is grounds for the revocation of every license and a lifetime ban.

It seems that even potheads are reluctant to fly on airplanes piloted or maintained by dopers.

[HockeyMom]

5. My BiPolar daughter cannot own a gun in NYS

She cannot join the police force, or the military. Anything involving guns. It's not just ILLEGAL drug use. She takes what is referred to as mood stabilizers. I suppose the worry is that if she DOESN'T take her meds what will happen.

I know what she was like before her treatment. Although I doubt she would kill somebody else if she had a gun while not taking her meds, I would never say never. A more likely scenario would be she would committ suicide because she did try several times. If she had owned a gun then, she probably would be dead now.

People with mental illnes should not be around guns. I have also worked with mentally ill adults. No, you do not want them anywhere near weapons, or anything that can even be used as a weapon.

[Katya Mullethov]

20. Do not discount the massive toll levied by unregulated ExActo knives

Auto exhaust and garden hose , drain cleaner and bleach , paring knives , subway platforms , precipices , and the seemingly benign and seductively ubiquitous extension cord .

[HockeyMom]

28. If my own daughter says she shouldn't own a gun,

or be around them, you want to argue with HER too? You think mentally ill, and BiPolar IS considered a mental illness, should be able to own guns? I doubt you have ever had to physically restrain your own child from killing herself either, now have you?

As far as "weapons", add jump ropes to your "list". We once had a VERY BIG 35 year old male patient, find a jump rope, run down the hallways, trying to grab and strangle any woman staff member he saw. I suppose YOU think we should have been armed and shot him in the head? FYI, two equally big male staff members threw him to the floor, wrapped him, and subdued him. His meds were subsequently increased and we had any more problems with him.

Unless you have personal experience with the mentally ill, save it. Don't tell me about rapists, burglars, etc., etc. I am talking about FAMILY MEMBERS and WORK experiences.

[Katya Mullethov]

44. I cut an ex wife down once and reinflated her

Does that count ?

[TheWraith]

58. Your daughter wouldn't qualify to own a gun whether she took prescriptions or not.

Nor would those others you describe. But to make the jump from someone thinking that recreational non-abusive drug use shouldn't disqualify you, to claiming that that person favors giving all mentally ill people guns, is ridiculous and rude.

[hack89]

7. Shall we monitor their alcohol purchases too?

think how many lives would be saved if you loose your privilege to drink if you cross a certain threshold of alcohol purchased in a week.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. Schumer is an anti zealot he will do anything to stop people from having firearms

Racist, classist, or just stupid, any excuse is good enough for him

[hlthe2b]

10. Well this is just clueless and stupid.

I'm not opposed to some rational steps being taken, but they need to be well considered and evidence-based in terms of likely effectiveness. Clearly this is neither.

[pnwmom]

21. It's already against the law for drug abusers to purchase guns.

This proposed bill would just be a way to help identify drug abusers. Sounds reasonable to me.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/16/schumer-require-military-report-applicants-drug-use-prevent-gun-purchases/

"After Jared Loughner was interviewed by the military, he was rejected from the Army because of excessive drug use. Now, by law, by law that's on the books, he should not have been allowed to buy a gun," Schumer told NBC's "Meet the Press."
"But the law doesn't require the military to notify the FBI about that, and in this case they didn't. So I --this morning -- I'm writing the administration and urging that that be done, that the military notify the FBI when someone is rejected from the military for excessive drug use and that be added to the FBI database," Schumer said.

[FreakinDJ]

9. Typical Knee Jerk Reaction

Given most these guys are serving in some God Forsaken Shit Holes with their friends being maimed and killed all around them and where the only normal human reaction is to anesthetize one's self at any given opportunity

[pnwmom]

12. Drug abusers shouldn't be able to purchase guns.

By current law, they're already barred from purchasing.

This bill would just help identify those people. It sounds like a good bill to me, too.

[hlthe2b]

23. This is like throwing out the tuna nets and ignoring the dolphins

that are caught up inside. Identifying those that have history only of recreational marijuana use for such repercussions makes no more sense than disallowing someone who had a DUI as a teen 40 years earlier.

Rational policy would be welcome. As described, this is not rational policy and would have little chance of any effect other than depriving rights to individuals for whom there are no grounds for doing so. I'm not a "gun person" but I do believe in rational policy where civil rights are concerned.

[pnwmom]

25. The army doesn't reject people who only have a history

of teen marijuana use. And they accept many of those who admit to using as adults.

And then there are the applicants like Loughner, who they should reject, and who shouldn't be allowed to buy guns.

[hlthe2b]

26. I already proved to you that they can and do in some instances.

The issue isn't whether serious drug offenders should be allowed guns. They should not. It is how do we prevent recreational users or those who may have been reformed for decades can avoid being caught up in such poorly thought out legislative efforts.

[pnwmom]

27. Yes -- and, so why would you want the ones that didn't pass

even their relatively relaxed standards about drug use to get guns?

[hlthe2b]

29. Because the decision may be totally arbitrary...

In many areas of the military it can depend on the person in charge as to whether a waiver should be issued or not. If that individual has a negative attitude towards recreational pot use or was a very straight arrow as a teen and can't understand how anyone could make a mistake, it is not hard to believe that officer to be unwilling to overlook.

What part of that is so hard to comprehend? Your tagline suggests you to be a Mom. Surely, you've experienced the mistakes of youth, if so, which would hardly (in most cases) render that child to be worthy of life long repercussions.

[pnwmom]

30. But we're not talking about children.

The army doesn't reject people on the basis of casual marijuana use before the age of 18.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/arjobs/bl67...


e) A soldier or potential enlistee will not be disqualified for teenage civilian experimentation with marijuana or other can nabinoids disclosed in voluntary confessions of dmg experimentation documented solely by information obtained from DD Form 1966, SF 88 or SF 93. (Experimentation is defined as one time use or casual use over a short period of time resulting from peer pressure.) The use disclosed must have occurred prior to the individual's 18th birthday, and prior to enlistment in any armed force.

[hlthe2b]

32. Given we had a recent President whose "youthful indiscretions'

apparently extended into his forties, that is an interesting attitude. Did you not make mistakes as an 18 year old that you would cringe at making as a 25 year old? a 35 year old? Into your 40s?

[pnwmom]

38. Not really. I was always cautious, even as an 18 year old.

Which is a characteristic that has advantages AND disadvantages.

When our kids reached adolescence, we let them know that drug use even as teens could have lifelong consequences. For example, if they wanted to become scientists or engineers, they might need a security clearance some day -- and that could be impacted by decisions they made now.

If parents want their children to be able to own a gun some day, they should warn them that abusing drugs might prevent them from being able to do so.

[SteveM]

55. So, a soldier can have a gun if he/she has smoked pot? That's okay?

But not Lougner, and you can tell the difference?

[Lurks Often]

15. Some questions for you then

1. Once on the list, how does one get off, or does admitting to a non-violent misdemeanor at say the age of 21 cost you a right for the rest of your life?
2. So you are ok with someone losing a right without the benefit of a trial?
3. You are aware that they don't prosecute people who fail the NICS background when trying to buy a gun.
4. Would this be considered a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act?
5. So what prevents people from lying about their drug use going forward? As long as they pass the piss test, how is the military going to know if they used drugs in the past?

[lawodevolution]

22. if we could just de-criminalize drugs we wouldn't have to worry about this

and crime rates would drop to be more like El Paso, Texas, around (5/763186)*100,000 or 0.65 murders per 100,000 in 2010.

If you're trying to understand why El Paso has such a low murder rate. The drug market is saturated, there is no money in controlling territory or even selling here, and there are almost no gun restrictions, but we are one of the most poor cities in the USA.

http://www.kvia.com/news/26345531/detail.html

[jody]

24. Schumer's idea is outstanding but not far enough. Anyone who has ever used drugs illegally should

lose all civil rights, entitlement to government assistance, and be disqualified from holding any position in government.

[shadowrider]

34. So how would the 3 people who are left pay enough taxes

to support the rest?

[jody]

35. Good point.

:toast:

[Katya Mullethov]

47. The beautiful part about that

Is it doesn't matter .

You can apply this to many things in government that dont make any fucking sense .
WTH would they ...oh ........cuz it doesn't matter !

[one-eyed fat man]

31. Some laws may need changing.

The military has long been constrained from revealing any reason someone may have been rejected for enlistment as the result of medical screening.

There are privacy laws that prevent the disclosure of medical history.

As an aside,

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?

It is ironic that someone who was stupid enough to show up for a drug test he KNEW in advance he was going to undergo was not so crazy that he didn't lie about his drug use on the 4473.

[jody]

33. Wonder how our last three presidents would have answered that question? n/t

[one-eyed fat man]

36. The question is in the present tense

As Euromutt has previously pointed out. So it is possible someone who had experimented with drugs was no longer an unlawful user.

I do have to chuckle at the mental of Bill having one of the boys in the Secret Service score some so he could get Monica in the mood.

[shadowrider]

37. The cigar was an added bonus n/t

[jody]

39. I used to smoke Havana Honey Cigars but I chuckle at Bill's method for coating cigars. nt

[shadowrider]

40. I saw someone once who put cigars up for sale

The were called "The Monica"

Their slogan:

The smell is Presidential

[jody]

41. OK that's a new one to me and I'm ROFL. n/t

[one-eyed fat man]

42. Actually, we should petion the ISU in Geneva

Frequency is measured in "Hertz"

Energy is measured in "Joules"

Power is in "Watts"

Pressure is in "Pascals"

What we don't have is a named International Scientific Unit measuring for vacuum!!!!

What is more closely associated with suction than Monica?

A milliMonica would not amount to much but a MegaMonica could suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

[shadowrider]

46. MegaMonica..(sigh) n/t

[Katya Mullethov]

48. 29.9999999 inches of Monica

probably still comes up quite often

[SteveM]

56. And when she found out, she got a tongue-lashing! nt

[X_Digger]

43. Fail a piss test and lose your rights? Umm.. fuck no, Chuckie. n/t

[Hoopla Phil]

45. So how would you feel if this standard was applied to the right to vote?

[mvccd1000]

49. Maybe we wouldn't elect so many representatives who seem like they're on drugs...

:)

[Euromutt]

50. Schumer's never met a circumvention of due process he didn't like, has he?

First the notion that people on the "Watch" and "No-Fly" lists should be included in NICS and now this. The fact that such a move could affect any number of people who would never have gone on to harm anyone along with, at most, a handful who would isn't an unfortunate side-effect: it's the whole point!

[benEzra]

51. Would this apply to *everyone* who has ever admitted they once used drugs?

There are a whole lot of Senators and Congresspeople on Capitol Hill that would become prohibited persons if this were to pass...

[PavePusher]

52. Shouldn't they all lead the way and take a "voluntary" test to demonstrate the process? n/t

[SteveM]

54. "no-brainer?" Well, you said it...

Tens of millions of Americans have used pot. Will you seek to deny these people the RKBA? Compounding one prohibition with yet another one? And using the FBI to do the dirty work? Hell, the states (even with millions of dollars) can't even report routine criminal records to NICS NOW.

I am struck by your statement: "This one act will probably do more to prevent gun crime than any amount of restrictions on guns will ever do." A rather comprehensive admission that gun-control measures have not been very effective, I'd say.

But we knew that.

[slackmaster]

57. Bad idea. The existing law does not say that anyone who ever in their life used drugs is prohibited

...from buying a gun.

Here is the applicable language from the United States Code:

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition

--- snip ---

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

--- snip ---

(6) who <2> has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

...

This comes down to what the definition of "is" is. Someone may have used a drug unlawfully in the past, or even have been a habitual unlawful user of a drug, and not be one right now.

A person who has been discharged dishonorably from the military for drug use would of course be prohibited.