Governor McDonnell Stands with Freedom When Questioned on Navy Yard Shooting

Governor McDonnell has been a true friend to supporters of the Second Amendment during his time as Governor and in the aftermath of the Navy Yard murders, he continues to stand firm. This from the Tampa Tribune:

"I've yet to see any conclusive data that suggests that a waiting period would work. We have an instant background check in Virginia. We are one of the first states to have that some 20 years or so ago," the pro-gun Republican governor said on Tuesday morning's program.

The Tribune article noted that even though the Navy Yard killer had numerous mental health issues, he passed a background check. What the Tribune did not mention was he had never been adjudicated as mentally disturbed.

Thanks Governor McDonnell for standing with law abiding gun owners.

Doctors Address Mental Health and Violence

Voice of America has the story.

Senator Harry Reid had been holding mental health reform hostage to passing new gun control laws.

Hat tip to The Gun Wire.

The Perils of Focusing on Mental Health and Firearms

HotAir.com has an article this morning titled Aaron Alexis and the Gun Control Mental Health Dodge.  He points to the peril in the mental health argument and how the gun ban lobby may have found an end run around simple gun control.

Better and more accessible care for the truly mentally ill is a worthwhile goal, and one which should be pursued. (And Kelly Ayotte already has a plan to do so without infringing anyone’s Second Amendment rights.) But we need to stand firm against any proposed federal legislation which purports to make everyone safer by keeping guns out of the hands of (or confiscating them from!!!) the mentally ill. That last sentence is sure to set the hair of many liberals afire, but there’s a reason for this sense of caution. You see, we already know where that path leads because we’ve seen the terminus of it in the state of New York, and it’s a nightmare.

Shaw is referring to what happened after the "NY Safe Act" became law when a man was confronted by police at the front door of his home and having his guns confiscated under threat of arrest.

The reason for the showdown was that authorities had mistaken him for somebody else who had committed the sin of seeking medical help and receiving medication for depression at one point in the past.

Shaw concludes that the nation already has a system in place for defining those who are too "deranged" to own firearms, that involves having people adjudicated as such in a court of law with the opportunity to defend themselves and challenge the finding if they wish.  We need to gaurd against any law that purports to protect all of us by further expanding who is mentally ill.  If the gun ban lobby had their way, they would classify anyone who wants to own a firearm as "mentally ill."

Hat tip to VSSA's Executive Director who forwarded the Hotair.com article.

Durbin Says Manchin/Schumer/Toomey Might Have Stopped Navy Yard Shooter From Getting Firearm

Based on what we know, (and admittedly the media has done a terrible job of getting the facts straight), the Navy Yard shooter legally purchased his shotgun after undergoing a background check at the firearm retailer.  So, this comment by Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin's reported in The Hill make's absolutely no sense:

Durbin, who is Reid’s top deputy, suggested on Tuesday morning that a measure to expand background checks — which the Senate defeated in April — might have prevented the shooting.

From my recollection, Manchin/Schumer/Toomey was to make sure all (or almost all) firearm transfer's went through a background check.  The Navy Yard shooter did submit to a background check and passed.  So, how exactly might Manchin/Toomey/Schumer prevented him from getting his firearm?

The shooter had several run-ins with the police in the last 10 years, none of which were prosecuted, or at least charged at a level that would make him a prohibited buyer.  Given these facts, even if Manchin/Toomey/Schumer had passed, it would have had no impact on the shooter's ability to purchase his firearm.  Second, it appears that the shooter had mental health issues - again, to my recollection, something not addressed by Manchin/Toomey/Schumer.  Charles Krauthammer discussed the mental health issue last night on Fox News.

For some reason, Congress does not want to address the mental health issue although that was supposed to have been one of the issues addressed after Newtown.  The administration and their allies in the Senate decided to focus only on gun control and when they lost that battle in April, moved on to other unrelated issues.

Jim Geraghty this morning pretty much summed-up why the renewed talk of gun control after Monday's murders rings particularly hollow:

I begin rather skeptical of most gun-control proposals. The ones that are pitched in the aftermath of mass shootings are particularly cynical, as they often attempt to regulate circumstances unrelated to the shooting.

And that is exactly the problem with all of this talk of background checks.  The shooter went through a background check and passed.  Nothing in the proposal from this past spring would have changed that.

National Journal Writer Says Navy Yard Shooting Proves Fallacy of NRA's "More Guns" Solution

National Journal's Mathew Cooper has this story that is just flat out wrong.  He either is uninformed on the law related to military facilities and firearms or he simply does not care about the facts:

The Navy Yard shooting exposes a fallacy in that argument. A military facility, the Navy Yard had plenty of good guys with weapons who were nonetheless were unable to stop Aaron Alexis, the alleged shooter, from killing a dozen innocent persons. In the coming weeks, we'll learn more about Navy Yard security and how Alexis was able to thwart it. (We'll also learn more about how he obtained his arms, but let's leave that aside for now.)

A little education Mr. Cooper; Military installations are technically “gun free” zones meaning that military and civilian personnel are prohibited from possessing weapons without special authorization. This policy includes those living on military bases who are not allowed to keep personal weapons in their domiciles. Regulation 90-114 regulates firearms on military bases and was implemented by President Clinton in 1993.

Cooper then tries to qualify his totally incorrect statement:

True, the Navy Yard is not a heavily armed facility. It's not like, say, walking into a military base in the U.S. let alone onto a war zone. But neither was it the kind of gun-free school zone that the NRA has described as an inviting target for crazed shooters. It was at least as heavily armed as we can expect any elementary school could ever be under the National School Shield program. And yet, carnage.

Which is the point we have been making about why teachers and administrators should have the right to be armed.  If the security guard at the school, or in the case of the Navy Yard, facility is taken down, you need additional people to be armed as back-up.  Speaking to the issue of military installations, we trust enlisted personnel to be armed on the battlefield, but not on base?  We saw at Fort Hood just how prohibiting military personnel from being armed worked out.  The bad guy (the Fort Hood shooter) disobeyed the regulation and went on a shooting rampage while his victims abided by the restriction and paid the price. Gun Free Zones (which the Navy Yard was in essence) only prevent law abiding people from carrying firearms.

Again, Gun Ban Advocates Use Mass Murder to Push Gun Control

Christina Bellantoni and Katelyn Polantz have this story on PBS.org on how talk has turned to gun control after the mass murders in DC at the Navy Yard yesterday.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., an advocate for gun control since the assassinations of San Francisco's mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk in 1978, went there.

"Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life," she said Monday.

Reports are that the shooter entered the Navy Yard with a shotgun purchased in Lorton, VA, and later took an AR-15 and handgun from one or more of his victims.  It has also been reported that he was a federal contractor, and that he had previous run-ins with the police. 

So, if he was a federal contractor, apparently he was not prosecuted on the previous charges, or at least not with a charge that barred him from legally purchasing a firearm or holding a federal job because contractors go through the same background checks that federal workers are required to undergo.  It would appear, based on what we know at this time, this is not an issue of gun laws being to lenient, but of a criminal justice system that once again let someone slip through the cracks that should have been stopped long ago (as far back as 2004), whether for violations of the law, or for other issues that have come to light after the shooting.

Hat tip to From the Barrel of a Gun.