Federal database for gun-buyer checks.

[Eric J in MN]

From the AP:

After Cho was evaluated at a psychiatric hospital in late 2005, a judge found that the student "presents an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness." That should have disqualified him from purchasing a gun under federal law, experts say.

But Virginia court officials insist that because the judge ordered only outpatient treatment — and did not commit Cho to a psychiatric hospital — they were not required to submit the information to be entered in the federal databases for background checks.

Apparently, there is ambiguity in current federal law.

Can we all agree that federal law should be amended to clearly state that anyone ruled by a judge that he "presents an imminent danger" should be barred from buying a gun for a long time?

[mrcheerful]

1. The law already is clear on that. What the court is doing is making up lame excuses on why they once

again failed to follow law. They pull the same crap when they sentence an innocent person to prison, then all of a sudden after years of false imprisonment they "discover" that due process wasn't followed. It's never the courts fault for these failures.

[Eric J in MN]

2. If federal law is already clear, then I hope...

...there is a lawsuit to force Virginia to comply with it.

[mrcheerful]

3. There won't be any lawsuits over it. You can't sue the courts for screwing up.

The real problem is the court system is broken and every effort has been made to keep it broken. They are very wellprotected from any legal actions being taken by the courts failures or actions.