21 Shot dead at Virginia Tech

[drizzt3117]

Originally Posted by Buickguy

Under federal law, from that moment on, he was a prohibited person (GCA '68). This should have shown up on his NICS (brady law) check when he attempted to purchase. If the purchase was made prior to his commitment, he was required to surrend all lirearms to the local authorities after his commitment

The U. Tex. 1966 incident is what cause most major police juridictions to train and deploy some form of special response team.

Yeah, this was reclarified in the FOPA '86 as well. Therefore, his purchase should have been illegal...

Prohibited persons:

1. Anyone who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, excluding crimes of imprisonment that are related to the regulation of business practices.

2. Anyone who is a fugitive from justice.

3. Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.

4. Anyone who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.

5. Any alien illegally or unlawfully in the United states or an alien admitted to the United states under a nonimmigrant visa.

6. Anyone who has been discharged from the US Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions.

7. Anyone who, having been a citizen of the United states, has renounced his or her citizenship.

8. Anyone that is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner.

9. Anyone who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. (See the Lautenberg Amendment.)

10. Anyone who is under the age of 18 for a shotgun or rifle, or under age 21 for a handgun. (See 18 U.S.C. § 922 (b)(1).)

 

[lee_44106]

You amateur "psychiatrists" are taking quite a liberal intepretation of anyone being admitted to a mental health facility as being "mentally defective,"

The authorities, per report, are attempting to obtain his medical records through a warrant. Until details of his actual psychiatric diagnosis is available, one must assume he was not "mentally defective" and thus legally able to purchase a firearm.

 

[gdl203]

I think Buick and drizz are refering to the fact that he may have been committed to a mental institution (as reported by some news source), which is the second part of the sentence

4. Anyone who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.

I think it is still unclear now whether or not he was committed or went to that mental institution voluntarily.

 

[globetrotter]

yeah, the paper seemed to suggest he was commited involentarily

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by drizzt3117

Yeah, this was reclarified in the FOPA '86 as well. Therefore, his purchase should have been illegal...

Prohibited persons:

1. Anyone who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, excluding crimes of imprisonment that are related to the regulation of business practices.

2. Anyone who is a fugitive from justice.

3. Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.

4. Anyone who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.

5. Any alien illegally or unlawfully in the United states or an alien admitted to the United states under a nonimmigrant visa.

6. Anyone who has been discharged from the US Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions.

7. Anyone who, having been a citizen of the United states, has renounced his or her citizenship.

8. Anyone that is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner.

9. Anyone who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. (See the Lautenberg Amendment.)

10. Anyone who is under the age of 18 for a shotgun or rifle, or under age 21 for a handgun. (See 18 U.S.C. § 922 (b)(1).)

I haven't heard anything that would suggest this guy falls under #4. I've heard nothing about a judicial proceeding resulting in a determination that he was a "mental defective", nor anything about his having been committed.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

I haven't heard anything that would suggest this guy falls under #4. I've heard nothing about a judicial proceeding resulting in a determination that he was a "mental defective", nor anything about his having been committed.

Although I now see from some other posts that there may be reports indicating this.

 

[DNW]

Originally Posted by amerikajinda

I read in some Korean newspapers that the killer's parents tried to commit suicide after hearing what their son did:

https://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/d...0704180092.asp

This is really sad. I wouldn't be surprised if both of his parents have already committed suicide. Reputation matters a great deal in the Korean culture, and I don't see how they will be able to look anyone in the eye after this. Of course, this is not a comment on whether they are responsible, but an observation based on my interactions with Korean friends and acquaintances.

 

[zjpj83]

Originally Posted by globetrotter

yeah, the paper seemed to suggest he was commited involentarily

I believe not. I believe it was following a court's declaring him mentally unbalanced after he stalked two girls

 

[zjpj83]

BTW, he sent a package full of **** to NBC.

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Originally Posted by zjpj83

I believe not. I believe it was following a court's declaring him mentally unbalanced after he stalked two girls

That sounds pretty involuntary to me...

 

[globetrotter]

Originally Posted by zjpj83

I believe not. I believe it was following a court's declaring him mentally unbalanced after he stalked two girls

I thought that I had seen that the court sent him for involentary observation. I am not familiar with how that works.

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Originally Posted by globetrotter

I thought that I had seen that the court sent him for involentary observation. I am not familiar with how that works.

That would be the next step.

The court would not declare someone mentally irregular, and then release them back out into society unchecked.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

That would be the next step.

The court would not declare someone mentally irregular, and then release them back out into society unchecked.

I realize you're speaking colloquially, but it occurs to me that many people probably wouldn't consider it flattering to be described as "mentally regular".

 

[zjpj83]

The NBC package contents will be shown on Nightly News at 6:30

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by zjpj83

BTW, he sent a package full of **** to NBC.

Just saw the CNN headline. Before that, I inferred from your post that he'd really sent them a package of ****, not just, you know, ****.