> This bill could provide $1.1 billion to help states improve their data bases for gun background checks, with penalties against states that fail to upgrade their technology. That was the stick that brought Hatch in. This is an authorizing bill, however, and when the appropriations process gets to it, in the present climate, the money will likely be considerably less. Still, we should wonder, what> '> s going on here! Crime policy legislation, although I argue is smoldering under the surface, has been invisible for months. Why this and these strange political bedfellows now? Your theories?
This month I've represented a perfectly innocent Seattle-area purchaser who was denied, appealed on his own to NICS, and was turned down again. After a fair amount of time I discovered that some local Michigan state police officer entered a "mental health order" identifying the person subject to the order only by the same quite common first and last name and date of birth. NICS denied my client even though the DOB was slightly different. Situation resolved when Michigan added a middle name to the NICS database (Lansing records office person was exceptionally receptive and helpful, unlike local state police office).
My theory? Too many problems like this, so far too many persons angry at NICS, so before they will reauthorize it they have to fix the problems. My client sure isn't going to vote for any politician who accepts the NICS program as is.
Eric Stahlfeld
