CY:

If a firearms seller has refused to deal with someone because something seems indefinably off, does the law as written allow him to take further steps to keep the person from buying elsewhere?

There isn't anything legally that I'm aware of to do that, and I don't know if it is even possible to codify something being "off," as that is a subjective and impossible to define matter of judgement.

I'd be very leery of this because what is mental illness? Could it be someone guilty of a hate crime for instance? Or alleged spousal abuse or even sexual harassment? My guess is that mental illness will soon encompass smoker, drinkers, the over weight, rgistered GOP voters, white guys, christians (you have to b mental to believe in God), etc.

But what about actual mental illness, TJ? It exists. It can make people dangerous. Certainly you don't want these folks to have guns, as well.

but we would not want retail salesmen, even firearm salesmen, to decide if someone is mentally ill. I think that could lead to serious abuse, even if it might catch folks in special cases.

I heard about this while I was driving around on Tuesday-- apparently, the actual text says that they have to be found not to have a mental problem.

In the military, at least the Navy, if someone tells a superior that I seem to be showing signs of a mental problem, they're required to put me under servelence and enter that in my record.

That notation was put in because a lot of vets were automatically monitored for mental illness simply because they were in a combat zone-- if they saw firefight or not.

The mandatory quarterly update of status should be a relief to those guys who've had bogus restraining orders slapped on them by psycho women.

Ignore the news stories - read the actual bill. I really didn't see anything in it to complain about.

but we would not want retail salesmen, even firearm salesmen, to decide if someone is mentally ill.

And what precisely do you think happens under the current system? Gun sellers have always been asked to use their judgement when determining whether or not to sell a firearm to a potential customer.

Do you honestly think a database in a far-off state is better equipped to judge a potential buyer's basic compentence, obvious stability, or possible alcohol or drug intoxication than an actual person three feet away?

Let me provide some real-world examples.

I had a guy come in and ask to see a firearm when I could smell the alcohol on him. A database wouldn't pick that up.

I've turned away a potential buyer because he seemed very agitated and angry when he came in to buy a shotgun. Who you rather I armed someone in this apparent state?

I've turned away another man because he asked point blank if a certain rifle was capable of killing a person from far away. Again, would you rather I sold this man the rifle?

A father and teen-aged son have made repeated trips to our establishment over the past year. They are so grossly (almost comically) incompent and unsafe in their handling of firearms that every employee who has dealt with them feels they would be a hazard to themselves and others if armed.

Once, the father actually pulled the muzzle towards his eye to look down the barrel while the son has his hand on the grip. Thank God we have trigger locks on all our display guns.

To date, I know one employee who has gently suggested that they take a firearms safety course before considering a purchase, which they blew off in a huff. They have done a lot of looking, but haven't tried to make a purchase. We've decided that until display more compentence and safety, we will not sell to them. To arm them would probably be criminally negligent, and is certainly morally so.

We are not asked to make a clinical diagnosis, but we are required morally and legally to refrain from selling firearms to those individual that we judge to be potentially dangerous, unstable, or impaired.

Had you been on hand to witness any of the examples cited above (and I'm certain other dealers have far more extreme examples), you probably would have judged us as mentally defective had we allowed the sale... unless, of course, you think we should trust a database somewhere instead of our own eyes, and sell firearms to homicidally-curious, agitated, unstable, or obviously intoxicated individuals.

I can answer your concern for the ability of "mental health experts" to certify that someone is "cured". If you would consider that just about anything regarding mental health is as close to voodoo as you can get, then you are on the mark. Despite over 100 years of observation and attempted treatment with the introduction of numerous psycho active drugs, the knowledge and treatment of mental health issures in still in the stone age. Often, the people who are professionals in this group of physicians are worse off than their patients. So when they say they are well treated, lock up the guns, close the store and barracade the door.

As a psychiatrist I would echo your concerns over allowing the seriously and persistantly mentally ill to buy firearms. I am also skeptical of "cures" in psychiatry, with the possible exception of some simple phobias and minor depressive syndromes. I think the best advise is the one you gave - for clerks to be vigilent in their gut level assessment of potential buyers. To rely simply on a database to tell us what to do is foolhardy and would result in guns being sold to people who should never have them. As to Dr Caskey, the brain is a wonderfully complex organ and is far from being understood, but that does not mean we have made no progress and are merely modern day witchdoctors. To be involved in treating the mentally ill you have to be comfortable with a high degree of uncertainty as the medical knowledge base is simply not there to provide a high degree of certainty. Even in the area of a "simple" electromechanical pump such as the heart, our knowledge base continues to grow and treatments are improved.

sy: PSYCHIATRY is partially a science but PSYCHOLOGY is NOT

theres no agreement on if many psychological disorders EXIST like asperger, passive/aggressive, dislexya &etc

there are good tests for some like SOCIOPATH but these are notoreously hard to apply!

disorders are REDEFINED every year

psychology == NO PREDICTIVE POWER

PSYCHIATRY is partially a science but PSYCHOLOGY is NOT psychology == NO PREDICTIVE POWER

Thank you, Tom Cruise. Try not to jump on the couch, okay?