The Real Challenge With Background Checks

This should really be an easy issue and decision relative to gun violence and limitations on ownership. Background checks have the support of most people and constituencies including the membership of the NRA. It's just something that seems to make sense to a lot of people. In addition, many people are exposed to background checks in various aspects of life currently. Employers, employees, hospitals, day care centers, schools organizations providing support to vulnerable populations, all of these are involved in checks of some form or another. Finger prints, arrest records and address verification have become fairly common things to check on all sorts of levels. Not to say any of this is without concerns by civil libertarians.

So why is the discussion and decision so hard to resolve? Part of it is because no one yet is talking about the real problem relative to the mental health issue. Again, this is easier said then done. Everyone seems to be in agreement that a seriously mentally ill person shouldn't have access to weapons. People begin to skirt around the issue with privacy concerns related to the Health Insurance Portability and Protection Act, a federal law protecting individual privacy in relation to protected health information. But this is really just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure arguments could and probably have been made that the information can be shared based on safety concerns (harm to self or others).

The harder issue though and in my mind the more difficult one, has to do with mental illness itself. People want to make the discussion easy but it's not. Obviously people have fought for years to change perceptions about mental illness and the stigma associated with it. Many aspects of mental illness are treatable and people can lead very normal lives. People and the mind change. Then there are mental illnesses that work and appear in cycles or episodes, some fairly predictable and some not so predictable. There are issues around medication use and the control of a particular symptom. What about institutionalization, treatment and reentry into the community? Who determines diagnosis and for how long? How would data get in and perhaps more importantly out of an information system? Is it wrong to think a person with a history of mental illness may want and benefit from hunting with a family member or friend? Is mental illness (related to background checks) forever?

To me, these are the discussions that are really hard and at the crux of the mental health discussion. I haven't heard them yet. What I have heard are things like 'crazy people shouldn't have guns, it's obvious'. There's the rub. It's not so obvious. There are nuances that have to be talked about and thought about and I'm not sure anyone's willing to start a discussion that may be pretty circular and difficult. But we're going to have to have it if anything is going to change.

This will be tougher then people think. Should be easy but I don't think it will be.