[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 29, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1931-S1932]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT ACT

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, the intent of the National Instant 
Criminal Background Check System, NICS, Improvement Act of 2007 is to 
increase compliance with existing law in order to prevent guns from 
getting into the hands of those with mental health concerns who might 
cause harm to others.
  Unfortunately, the initial draft of this legislation would have 
expanded the existing classes of people forbidden by statute from 
possessing or purchasing a weapon to include people who simply had 
trouble managing their finances or other personal affairs. This 
expansion of existing law would have legitimized overly broad 
regulations that included people who have never been found to be a 
danger to themselves or to others.
  This is problematic because these overly broad regulations have 
allowed for the criminalization of veterans who needed help managing 
the benefits they received for serving our country. These veterans lost 
their constitutional right to bear arms without committing a crime, 
without going before a court of law, and without being found to be a 
possible danger to themselves or anyone else. Furthermore, they lost 
their rights without their knowledge, and without a way to restore 
them.
  For this reason I did not consent to H.R. 2640 until these concerns 
were adequately addressed.
  Nobody wants firearms in the hands of individuals who are a danger to 
themselves or to others, but this desire for safety must be adequately 
balanced with a respect for our Constitution and the right to bear 
arms. While I favor keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and 
those who are a danger to themselves or to others, I was concerned that 
this bill would unnecessarily and unfairly hurt our veterans and other 
law-abiding Americans.
  The initial version of this bill codified overly broad regulations 
for what it means to be ``adjudicated as a mental defective'' to 
include individuals who are in no danger to themselves or to others, 
but cannot manage their own finances or other personal affairs. These 
regulations were determined independent of congressional intent and are 
overly inclusive.
  As a result of this definition, Americans who have never committed a 
crime and are of no danger to themselves or to others have been 
unfairly included in NICS. Once added to this list, it has been nearly 
impossible for an individual to remove their name from this list, 
meaning they are prohibited from owning a firearm for the rest of their 
life.
  Among those unfairly added are up to 140,000 veterans who receive 
benefits for their service to our country, because they cannot manage 
their own affairs. This bill would have made this overly inclusive 
definition law.
  Fortunately, Senator Schumer and I were able to work together to 
erase all mention of this definition in the bill. The term 
``adjudicated as a mental defective'' is not defined in law. By not 
codifying these overly inclusive regulations, Congress and the Bureau 
of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Enforcement have a another chance to 
develop regulations for what ``adjudicated as a mental defective'' 
means to more accurately protect the second amendment rights of law-
abiding citizens.
  Additionally, we made several other changes to improve this bill. The 
bill now ensures: Veterans are notified when they are added to this 
list to ensure they do not knowingly violate Federal law and also lets 
them know when they enter into a determination process that could lead 
to them being added to this list; those who believe they have been 
unfairly added to NICS have their applications for removal from this 
list processed; those who previously were adjudicated as a mental 
defective but no longer pose a threat to society are cleared from this 
list; a State program exists that allows those wrongfully included on 
this list to appeal their inclusion; and that compensation is available 
for those who prove they were wrongfully included on NICS in court.
  These changes strike a much healthier balance between ensuring the 
second amendment rights of our veterans and other law-abiding citizens 
and removing guns from those who are a threat to our society.
  It is also important for Americans to realize that this bill, if 
enacted earlier, would not have prevented the tragic Virginia Tech 
shootings. This bill does not change Federal law regarding who should 
be added to NICS. States still have to decide to what extent they will 
report those adjudicated as a mental defective to the national list.
  Under existing law, the Virginia Tech gunman already was considered a 
mentally dangerous person and should not have been allowed to purchase 
a weapon. At the time of the shootings, he was prohibited from 
purchasing any guns because two different judges found him to be a 
danger to himself or others. Additionally, the gunman should have been 
barred from buying a gun because he had been involuntarily committed 
for mental treatment.
  He should have been reported to NICS because of a law passed last 
decade that required States to report people like him to the Federal 
system so that they would be prohibited from purchasing weapons. 
Unfortunately, because of a communications breakdown among Virginia 
authorities, this did not occur.
  Since the Virginia Tech tragedy, several States have begun submitting 
these records to NICS and added hundreds of thousands of persons to the 
database without any additional Federal law being passed. According to 
the Washington Post, nearly 220,000 names have been added to this FBI 
list of people prohibited from buying guns because of mental health 
problems--a more than double increase in only 7 months.
  While the intent of this legislation is good, Congress owes it to all 
Americans to pass legislation that is necessary and does not have 
unintended

[[Page S1932]]

consequences that compromise the rights of law abiding citizens.
  I am thankful for the opportunity for my concerns to be addressed and 
believe this bill is much improved.

                          ____________________