Obama taking action on gun background check system

April 19, 2013 @ 3:03 am


President Barack Obama, next to Vice President Joe Biden, gestures as he speaks during a news conference in the Rose Garden of the White House, in Washington, on Wednesday, April 17, 2013, about the defeat in the Senate of a bill to expand background checks on guns. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) | Zoom

WASHINGTON (AP) - Blocked by Congress from expanding gun sale background checks, President Barack Obama is turning to actions within his own power to keep people from buying a gun who are prohibited for mental health reasons.

Federal law bans certain mentally ill people from purchasing firearms, but not all states are providing data to stop the prohibited sales to the FBI's background check system. A federal review last year found 17 states contributed fewer than 10 mental health records to the database, meaning many deemed by a judge to be a danger still could have access to guns.

The Obama administration was starting a process Friday aimed at removing barriers in health privacy laws that prevent some states from reporting information to the background check system. The action comes two days after the Senate rejected a measure that would have required buyers of firearms online and at gun shows to pass a background check. That's already required for shoppers at licensed gun dealers.

Stung by the defeat, Obama vowed to keep up the fight for the background check expansion but also to do what he could through executive action.

"Even without Congress, my administration will keep doing everything it can to protect more of our communities," Obama said from the Rose Garden shortly after the Senate voted. "We're going to address the barriers that prevent states from participating in the existing background check system."

Obama also mentioned giving law enforcement more information about lost and stolen guns and establishing emergency plans for schools. Those measures were among the 23 executive actions the president signed in January when he announced his broader push for tighter gun laws in response to a mass shooting of first-graders and staff at Newtown, Conn.'s Sandy Hook Elementary School.

The Health and Human Services Department on Friday was beginning to ask for public comment on how the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, passed by Congress in 1996 and known as HIPAA, is preventing some states from reporting to the background check system and how to address the problem. Under HIPAA, health care providers such as hospitals may release limited information to police, but only in certain circumstances such as when a court is involved.

Since 1968, federal law has banned the sale of guns to those who have been deemed a danger to themselves or others, involuntarily committed or judged not guilty by reason of insanity or incompetent to stand trial. The background check system _ which is also used to prevent convicted felons from buying guns _ was established under the 1993 Brady Bill.

A few state agencies shared mental health records voluntarily for years, but the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007 spurred passage of legislation that required states to submit the records or eventually risk losing up to 5 percent of the federal funding they receive to fight crime.

Last year's review by the Government Accountability Office found that although the number of mental health records available to the background check system increased 800 percent since 2004, some states said they were not sharing mental health information because of concerns about restrictions under HIPAA privacy law. Obama is interested in a change that would specifically allow disclosure of mental health records for the system, and he wants to increase financial incentives for states to contribute the information.

In the Virginia Tech rampage, student Seung-Hui Cho shot 32 people to death and committed suicide. He was able to buy two guns even though he had been ruled a danger to himself during a court hearing in 2005 and was ordered to undergo outpatient mental health treatment.

Authorities have not described a possible motive or released details of any mental health condition that might explain why Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza killed 20 children and six adults before killing himself. The rifle he used was purchased by his mother, whom he also killed at home before heading to the school.

The background check system does not give retailers access to mental health records but simply tells them whether a buyer is approved, denied or needs additional investigation before a firearm may be purchased. The system doesn't tell the seller why a potential buyer was denied.

___

Follow Nedra Pickler on Twitter: https://twitter.com/nedrapickler


(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
More National News
Top Stories

  • Devastation
    Oklahoma City tornado kills at least 50, dozens of kids missing

  • Twister Terror
    Gallery: Deadly Oklahoma tornado

  • Messiest
    New lane restrictions mean Mercer Street is tough to travel during afternoon commutes
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (122)


  • Add A Comment

  • dori monson fan wrote...
    anyone ever been to kamiakin jr. high?
    January 16, 2013 1:09 pm
    their mascot is the victim of gun violence. seriously, they have a dead stuffed cougar in a glass case that was itself the victim of gun violence on display in their halls!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • dbhawkfan84 wrote...
    FUNNY
    January 16, 2013 2:48 pm
    The last time I saw Obama singing something he had a child with him (Obamacare) This is not a good thing. Just more regulation, more idiots telling us what we should do with our "so called" freedom. Those kids don't even know why they're up there. They are using them to get to weak people who can't make up their own minds.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    With all this "Gun Controll"media circus in full operation,
    January 16, 2013 3:00 pm
    what SUBTERFUGE is this regime up to with the media and most of us looking the other way?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sambra27 wrote...
    It's me! Ha ha!
    January 16, 2013 3:23 pm
    I couldn't tell you what subterfuge he is up to (fantastic word, by the way), but since you are very adept in the art of paranoid delusional predictions involving the downfall of "Your America", please enlighten your awestruck audience on exactly how Obama is creating a deceitful distraction using gun control measures, and what exactly it is he does not want us to focus on?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ratrustle wrote...
    All this energy and resources!
    January 16, 2013 3:11 pm
    Of all the things that we're wasting our time on? At least we found something for Biden to do...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Rat
    January 16, 2013 4:05 pm
    And Biden rose to the task fantastically.He is probably one of the BEST VPs in history
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    half a trillion in stupid spending...
    January 16, 2013 5:06 pm
    Obama wants to spend half a trillion dollars but still won't fix the problems. Progressives will provide rebates for buying electric cars and just about every other leftist dream but not a penny to defray the cost of gun safes that would help save lives. Why does Obama and the progressives hate children so much?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    rational
    January 16, 2013 6:12 pm
    Half a trillion? Since when was $500 million a half a trillion?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    wsualumn
    January 16, 2013 7:37 pm
    you are correct...I misread million as billion....gosh, is Obama even ware of numbers in the millions?! Most of Obama's blatant spending has been in the billions as if it means nothing. I stand corrected.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    Obama's Spending?
    January 16, 2013 9:22 pm
    Try congress. Obama's proposals for spending has primarily been spending to keep the government going. I would surely like to know where The GOP was in the complaint department about fiscal matters from 2000 to 2008. Both parties need to agree to reign in spending, the problem is what the 2 can agree on as to what should be cut. How about pulling completely out of Afghanistan? That costs the tax payers $2 billion a week. That's right, a week. If they can't agree as to where to cut, how about 10% across the board for starters?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    wsualumn
    January 16, 2013 9:54 pm
    I would surely like to know where The GOP was in the complaint department about fiscal matters from 2000 to 2008.

    Typically liberal complaint...are you at all aware the year is 2013?! So you're complaing about the idiots from 5 years ago and ignoring the idiots currently in power? What gives with liberals? eye on the ball man!

    I agree, out of afganistan...but are you aware it was Obama that put MORE troops there?

    As for cuts...how about across the board? But Obama refuses to compromise on anywhere...no cuts, only more spending. We are doomed...and if you voted for the clown in chief you are responsible...and your Obama stickers on your cars just indicate "idiot inside".

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational
    January 16, 2013 10:15 pm
    The Generals wanted a surge and following that advice Obama obliged them.I WAS AGAINST this surge 100%.I have learned that Generals usually give advice that benefits Generals.You Rightys have yet to catch on that folks like Obama and Hillary are among the HAWKs.Its a myth that the Dems don't like a little Bloodshed just like the GOPers
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    messiah101
    January 16, 2013 10:47 pm
    .Its a myth that the Dems don't like a little Bloodshed just like the GOPers

    I agree and appreciate you pointing out the myth. I haven't been fooled on this account for a very long time, but it's amazing how many dems believe their own lies.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    Hold On
    January 17, 2013 6:14 am
    What the GOP did in the past should play a roll in what they complain about now. Yes, the same goes for The Dems as well. Obama refuses to compromise? Really? That wasn't the case when Obama met with Boehner last year. Significant enough cuts that his party wasn't happy. Let's see what The Party of "no" says if Obama says 10% cuts in military and money to Israel. How about farm subsidies and and oil subsidies? How about no more money for the contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan? The jobs that the military used to perform. It works both ways. If you choose to blame the people that voted for Obama as being the problem, you don't get it. If your party can't scrape up a decent enough candidate to defeat him, that speaks volumes about where your party has gone. Calling the 47% nothing more than "moochers" was brilliant. My retired dad that served in WWII and doesn't make enough with his pension and social security fit Mitts description. Keep blaming the voters and not the party. Keep it up.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational
    January 16, 2013 10:11 pm
    I seriously doubt that the cost will be anywhere near $500 mil but any how these costs should of course be picked up by gun owners.I'd like to see who came up with that bloated price tag,it couldn't be the Rightys could it?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    messiah101
    January 16, 2013 10:51 pm
    To be honest, I don't know who provided the $500 million price tag...I think it's on left leaning websites not just right ones, so I tend to think it's not all that much disputed. And do you really think anything related to the Obama admin citing $500 million would be considered bloated? Seems on the low side given Obama's spending record.

    In any case, why not have the cost carried by the insane...it is really them we are trying to protect again after all.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Snout wrote...
    Never let a crisis go to waste.
    January 17, 2013 1:50 am
    Wasting our money is much more fun.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • fartforce1 wrote...
    Gemme a break! I don't think limiting the size of a mag and stopping the production of semi auto rifles is anti gun.
    January 17, 2013 3:29 am
    The 2nd amend does not apply because the power is granted to the states to design their militia, and the argument that it is your own gun that keeps you safe from invasion then i guess you have no faith in the US military so it should be unfunded. Truth is that the NRA backers will still sell guns and people will still shoot people them. But while they are shooting at me I want the shooter to be reloading whilst I am drawing my aim for the kill.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    fartforce1
    January 17, 2013 6:45 am
    I don't think limiting the size of a mag and stopping the production of semi auto rifles is anti gun.

    I agree with you, a gun is an inanimate object. Obama is anti American citizen in his efforts to remove our constitutional rights. So much for the left valuing rights despite their frequent use of that word.

    You're deluded if you think the criminals will follow the law while they are shooting at you. They will have large capacity magazines...you're the one that's going to have the limited firepower. Think man...schools and that movie theater were no-gun zones and folks ignored that law...why do you think they'll comply with capacity laws? Are progressives really that freaking stupid? Honestly.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SickofSeattleite wrote...
    what about the
    January 17, 2013 5:36 am
    deficit!!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Be worried about Congress Dear Leader.
    January 17, 2013 5:49 am
    Be more worried about the NRA and far more worried about what we Americans will do.

    IMPEACHMENT comes to mind!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Rick W7PSK wrote...
    I bet Obama would use this statement Used once before
    January 17, 2013 6:15 am
    The state must declare the children to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation

    Most anyone will recognize whom said it

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sambra27 wrote...
    really, Rick?
    January 17, 2013 8:44 am
    There we go again with the Hitler comparison. Let me ask you, what is the ONE THING you think of when you think of Hitler?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }