Joannou- Wrong Side of History

In 2000 the great Delegate from Manasaas, Harry Parrish introduced this bill:

"Possession of firearms by persons voluntarily admitted to a mental institution. Prohibits persons voluntarily admitted to a public mental health facility pursuant to § 37.1-65, or to a private mental health facility, from purchase, possession or transportation of firearms.  Under current law, this prohibition only applies to persons involuntarily committed to such facilities."

Exactly the legal loophole that the killer at Virginia Tech used.  Never again should a member of the legislature be allowed to claim that no one knew about this loophole. Harry Parrish is now deceased but this bill should serve as a reminder of his legacy.

While legislative action can not prevent every nutjob from doing something it can prevent them from doing it the easiest and most obvious way, and that can sometimes be enough to stop them.  I really wish the public would stop allowing politicians to "scenario" their way out of every tragedy with "other" ways it could have happened if they had taken action.  It's long past time for accountability.

So how did the Parrish bill to prevent all mental institution patients from buying guns do? 

It failed- 10 in favor and 11 opposed.  Even strong NRA supporters like Terry Kilgore voted yes on this commonsense bill.

The only Democrat left in the General Assembly who cast the deciding vote to kill this bill- Johnny Joannou.

I can deal with his anti-tax votes and his rebel personality.  I even like how Johnny takes on the arrogance of the Democratic Caucus.  But this vote indicates that his public service is focused on what Johnny wants, not what his constituents in greater Portsmouth support.  Someone has to be held accountable for the fact that this bill never became law, and it should be Johnny in the Democratic Primary on June 12th.

Vote for Henry Light.

UPDATE:  Similar Senate bill from 2003.  Nine Senators owe us an explanation.

Comments

[Kevin]

Warner's tax increase that helped the schools and saved the bond rating?

[Not Larry Sabato]

Much worse. I'm going to publish it early and put it up now.

Hey, let's give credit to another Democrat running in a primary who voted right on this bill -- Donald McEachin.

McEachin has always been a leader in favor of common-sense gun laws. That's why the NRA and other gun nuts despise him so much.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Good point.

[fannyboy]

Wag of the fanny to Ken Cooch for voting against this while he was in the Senate. Is anyone going to mention that?

FANNY

[Not Larry Sabato]

I don't see a Senate version of this bill. Please point us to it.

[Dannyboy]

I agree with you 100% Ben. While I tend to admire Johnny's independence, this goes too far. This was a perfectly reasonable bill that was accepted by many Second Amendment supporters. I mean, I support the Second Amendment, but this thing is really just common sense. Anybody who voted against this needs to take a serious look into his/her heart, especially with what has happened here in Blacksburg recently, and ask themselves one simple question: was it worth it?

[Not Jack Herrity]

Ben, I agree with you that this was a good bill. However, you have one critical fact wrong.

Cho was held involuntarily on a 48-hour "TDO" (temporary detention order). The TDO was issued by a magistrate after a social worker petitioned for Cho's involuntary commitment to a mental hospital.

As is common in Virginia, a judge found that there were alternatives to inpatient commitment and ordered Cho to receive outpatient treatment instead. I do not believe Cho ever sought treatment voluntarily, although the record is sketchy because many of his files have still not been released.

The loophole is that Cho was never formally committed to an inpatient treatment facility. Hence, according to Virginia's Resident Regent Graduate, he did not need to register as "mentally defective" under current law.

The loophole that exists is that court-ordered OUTPATIENT treatment does not require registration. This is a good bill, but based on the information I have (his actual TDO is posted on Slate) I don't think it would do the trick.

NJH

[fannyboy]

As much as I hate to give this (and I do hate to give this, so please don't take this personally), a wag of the fanny to NLS, for missing this bill, which I found doing only cursory research. It's Senate Bill 939, from 2003.

And a wag of the fanny to dannyboy, for mistaking Johnny Joannou's self-serving nature for "independence" -- and then admiring it.

[Tom James]

Why don't we start with not allowing non-citizens to purchase guns?

Not quite sure how the 2nd amendment applies to them?

Who defines a nutjob?

The people pushing dangerous anti-depressants?

Lot of science still out in this area.

After all anyone wanting to defend themselves is a "gun nut" from the McEachin post above.

Are the libs defining "nut jobs?" Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

http://caosblog.com/5010#comments

[Tom James]

All these shootings are not the fault of guns. They are the symptoms of a sick society.

Go after the illness not the symptoms.

[fannyboy]

Giant wag of the fanny to Tom James, who sounds pretty darn crazy himself.

Where did I hear the phrase "dangerous anti-depressants" last? Oh yeah, it was when I was accosted on the street by a band of whack-job scientologists.

[Kevin]

You're right Ben...this is much worse.

Yeah without supporting the wagging of anyone's fanny or any other body part, you might want to voluntarily commit yourself, Tom.

Incidentally, legal resident aliens are traditionally also afforded other Constitutional rights like due process, freedom of religion, etc.

[fannyboy]

ALERT ALERT ALERT

Pressing issue -- will dannyboy stand up to his boycrush Ken Stolle, who voted against the amendment in the Senate?

The blogosphere waits on baited breath, as its members watch classic Simpsons clips on youtube and bug their parents to buy them humidifiers for their furnished basements.

[Tom James]

Not sure how old SOMEONE who uses fannyboy as his name is and whether you are old enough to have a daughter, but replace that with mother or sister in this demonstration of why the law abiding citizen should be able to defend themselves.

http://carolinejustice.blogspot.com/2007/04/gun-control.html

[Tom James]

But we can continue to disarm law abiding "CITIZENS" who will respect the laws, and allow criminals and murder's who could care less about the law to prey on them.

Imean it's not Northern Va is not home to 2000+ of these lovely folks and we all know the law means so much to them.

http://carolinejustice.blogspot.com/2007/04/coming-to-caroline-you-better-listen-to.html

[fannyboy]

I gather by "SOMEONE" he is referring to me, but I am old enough to know that the setting, camerawork, and acting on that video are some of the worst I've ever seen! Costume design, anyone?

You receive an additional wag of the fanny, for having 50+ blog postings and a grand total of 0 comments, averaging 0 per post. Even dannyboy musters more than that with his cartoons!

Perhaps your anemic blog performance is due to your cleverness in using phrases like "Nappy Headed Cho" when referring to the Virginia Tech massacre. An additional wag of the fanny for that.

[Tom James]

Is that the best you can do?

What about the topic, or is that suddenly me since you don't have an adequate response?

Case closed. I don't need folks like you taking away rights I and many before me have paid dearly for.

Good luck to you sir.

[JMU Duke]

The argument that "some crazy people can get guns, so everyone else should have one too" just doesn't hold water.

If we live in a sick society, as you claim Tom (and I don't disagree) how is it possible that the next step in your mind is to arm the people living in the sick society? Get guns out of our schools, off of our streets and out of our homes and people will stop getting shot with them.

[Tom James]

So the bad guys aren't going to find a way to get them?

Why is these massacres only take place where people are defenseless?

No shootings at police stations, or NRA meetings, or military bases, or anywhere else there exist the possibility someone might shoot back.

What don't you get about that.

Did the 9-11 terrorist use guns to kill all of those people and scare our country and start WWIII.

How many guns involved in IED's.

Get real folks

[Tom James]

http://carolinejustice.blogspot.com/2007/04/why-im-not-pc.html

[Tom James]

Going to cut my grass. I'll check back for rational thought this evening.

[JMU Duke]

"So the bad guys aren't going to find a way to get them?"

That is why we have police officers, and a well-regulated militia. Not vigilante soccer moms and CPA's armed to the tooth.

[fannyboy]

My "response on the topic"?

You think that we should take "dangerous anti-depressants" away from crazy people and give them guns instead.

Any rational person can see how absurd your opinion is. Wag of the fanny!