Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: That’s optimism?
Next Post: Good government groups: Skip the opening remarks and get on with the meeting
Posted in:
* Sun-Times editorial…
As reported in the Sun-Times on Sunday, the State Police have largely ignored a state law that they track what happens to guns owned by thousands of people whose gun ownership rights have been revoked for mental health reasons. The state police started doing so only in recent weeks — and only after Sun-Times reporters Frank Main and Mick Dumke began asking questions.
Many local police departments also have paid no attention to the law, often unaware that it even exists.
At every level, then, law enforcement agencies in Illinois largely have failed to perform a basic and legally required task — check whether people whose gun ownership rights have been revoked for good reason are, in fact, complying with the law.
After the mass shooting at Virginia Tech University in 2007, Illinois required health professionals to notify the state of any patient showing “violent, suicidal, threatening or assaultive behavior.” Then, as part of a 2013 law allowing concealed carry in Illinois, State Police were required to send notification letters to Firearm Owner’s Identification Card holders when their cards are revoked. The cardholders have 48 hours to turn in the cards, transfer the firearms to the police or a valid FOID holder, or file a report with police saying how many guns they have, where they are and whether they plan to transfer ownership.
If they don’t follow the rules, police can get a warrant and search their homes.
The idea behind the law makes sense. The vast majority of people struggling with issues of mental health are not violent, obviously. And people who have been diagnosed with mental health issues are, almost by definition, seeking help. But it is a matter of common sense that people who have been judged a legitimate threat to themselves or others shouldn’t own guns.
Last year, the State Police revoked 1,415 cards because of mental health issues and denied 1,791 new applications. What they did not do is check to see if the people whose cards were revoked actually got rid of their guns. They don’t know if people whose cards have been revoked are complying with what the letters say they have to do.
* And along those same lines, here’s Wordslinger in comments today…
Since Sandy Hook, there have been more than 1,000 documented mass shootings in the United States.
Guess how many involved Syrian refugees?
Meanwhile, it was reported here the other day that 50,000 Illinoisans have been refused issuance or had their FOID cards revoked, under state law, due to mental illness.
Yet the ISP has no clue as to how many of those folks currently possess guns, illegally. and no authorities are employing the tools of the state law to find out.
That would appear to be a public safety issue.
Who in the administration is carrying the ball to ensure that state law is being executed faithfully, when it comes to guns and the mentally ill?
What’s gonna happen if, God forbid, we have a school shooting here and it turns out that the cops didn’t follow state law?
Get on it, folks. Now.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:06 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: That’s optimism?
Next Post: Good government groups: Skip the opening remarks and get on with the meeting
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
his would be a good turnaround agenda talking point…. spending money to cover governemtn finctions that have been neglected, or changeing the laws to remove the tracking and reporting
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:18 pm
Rich is absolutely right. Just as Wordslinger is right that this is a security measure that can be taken now. Everything is there except the will to enforce it.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:26 pm
“Since Sandy Hook, there have been more than 1,000 documented mass shootings in the United States.”
• http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Main_Page
• http://www.vox.com/a/mass-shootings-sandy-hook
• http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/11/mass-shooting-florida-1000th-sandy-hook
• http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mass+shootings+in+the+united+states+since+sandy+hook
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:27 pm
Most people that lose their FOID cards due to felony conviction or mental health issues have someone else in the household that have a legal right to own guns. The transfer between spouses or family can be done without waiting periods or checks. I would think this is they way most deal with this.
Comment by Nieva Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:37 pm
How many additional troopers will be needed to carry out this law? The last class of potential troopers was cancelled due to no budget. At best enforcement will be hit and miss.
Comment by Retired Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:38 pm
===The cardholders have 48 hours to turn in the cards, transfer the firearms to the police or a valid FOID holder===
Are they also required to turn in their Concealed Carry License, if they have one, when they turn in the FOID card?
Comment by Hit or Miss Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:39 pm
To “Hit or Miss”….yes, they are.
Comment by howie Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:42 pm
Hit or miss
FYI a ccw liscensce would not be valid for an IL resident without a FOID card. As well as being useless without a firearm.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 12:44 pm
The question is, who is going to pay for the extra LEOs to ensure there is proper follow up. You should also Google
pschyotropic drugs and mass shootings. That is a bigger issue.
Comment by Tuesday's Pizza Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:03 pm
Sounds like another chore for the SuperStar COO unless at the junket in Vegas…..wow workload piling up
Comment by Anonin' Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:05 pm
Research in the US and GB has not found a direct causal relationship between mental illness and gun violence. So, just because you have a mental illness does not mean you are going to use a gun to shoot/kill others. The vast majority of mentally ill people are not violent. Strong causal relationships do exist between prior violent behavior and gun violence and between mental illness and suicide. The mentally ill are far more likely to kill themselves (with a gun or otherwise) than they are to kill others. There are approx. 32,000 gun deaths per year in the US, fewer than 5% of these deaths can be attributed to the mentally ill. Someone is much more likely to be killed by a relative, acquaintance or friend than by a mentally ill person.
Comment by Former Hoosier Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:07 pm
This has nothing to do with the refugees
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:24 pm
I’m not so sure this will require that much additional revenue. ISP revokes foid a warrant is issued and then locals serve warrant. Granted some common sense may be required to do so as safely as possible but I expect most sheriffs and local pd can handle it.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:37 pm
FH, you’re moving the goal posts.
For years. the NRA has been telling us these mass shootings — Tuscon, Sandy Hook, Aurora CO, DeKalb — are a mental health problem, not a gun problem.
Here’s a state law that seeks to keep the mentally ill from having guns. Now that’s a problem?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:55 pm
Another mandate with no more money to do the job. ISP sworn levels are at lows not seen in 35 years. The number of troopers doing patrol work are half what they were 30 years ago. DNA lab work still has not been fixed when it comes to rape kits. MORE and more with less and less. It is also against the law to speed or talk on the phone, there is no enforcement, cell phone use is now at same levels prior to the hands free law because people know they won’t be caught.
Comment by ISP Retired Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:59 pm
The research shows that if you think keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill is going to solve the problems of shootings (including mass shootings) you’re wrong. The red herring on the left is more gun control legislation, the red herring on the right is keeping guns away from the mentally ill. Both are wrong…gun deaths are a far more nuanced problem. There is a lot of research out there addressing this issue but both sides choose to ignore it and go for the knee jerk reactions instead…they make better sound bites.
Comment by Former Hoosier Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:06 pm
FH
This is slightly different in that the law specifically states a danger to themselves or others. It is more focused than just mental health.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:21 pm
==- Former Hoosier - Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:06 pm:==
Tell us, oh great one, what is this research? What does it say? What are the policy prescriptions?
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:36 pm
Mason Born- This would absolutely require additional revenue. First, search warrants are not issued willy nilly; for a residence, they require a detailed description of the building, sometimes including pictures. This is after it’s verified as the correct address for the person. There is also a statement of facts that must be just as detailed indicating why the residence is to be searched and the probable cause gathered to justify it. The warrant is then subject to review by a State’s attorney who can sign off on it or reject it. Finally, a judge reviews it and can reject it for any reason. This process takes a minimum of around three hours if everything goes right.
Secondly, when the warrant is issued several officers would be required to execute it. You’re going into someone’s home to take away guns you know they have; this is not something to take lightly. Between the planning for execution of the warrant, the entry and securing of the residence, the actual search and completing the appropriate paperwork, you could be talking up to eight hours for a team of 10 police.
Next, there is the return of the search warrant, submission of evidence and paperwork regarding the serving and return of the warrant.
Based on last year’s number of 1415 revelations this process would need to be done 3.87 times per day, every day. That’s in addition to all the other duties mandated. I’m in no way saying it’s ok to continue not enforcing this law, I’m saying it is going to cost.
Comment by J. T. Spaulding Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:03 pm
Spaulding, if a police officer pulled me over for having no tail lights and I said I’m sorry, but I didn’t have the money to fix it, I’d still get a ticket.
This is the law of the land. They’re sworn to uphold those laws.
Get at it.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:05 pm
This is one of those obviously correct solutions that is extremely difficult to implement. The 50,000 number of revoked or denied FOID cards seems high, but go with it. More than half from last year were denials, so 20-25,000 cases of revocation. That is a lot of warrants, but doable.
Should they skip cases where a legal FOID card holder is in the house? Or should the law prohibit guns in the same house? The Sandy Hook shooter did not own the weapons he used. He killed his mother to get them.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:05 pm
J.t.
Thank you for correcting my eroneous assumption. That being said this seems more important than traffic tickets so perhaps reducing that expenditure to use the funds for this would be wise to me. They could prioritize based on residences w/o another foid holder present.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:14 pm
Law enforcement doesn’t have to enforce every law on the books. And I’m OK with that.
But I live in a city where cops allegedly care about seizing illegal guns and apparently have all the time in the world to shake down kids who ride their bikes on the sidewalk.
So between their professed values and their obviously adequate resources, CPD could certainly be held accountable for doing this.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:23 pm
CBH, according to Greg Hinz’s column yesterday, CPD has seized 6,252 illegal guns so far this year.
The Indiana and Mississippi gun show straw buyer connections are alive and well.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:36 pm
PC- I stated at 1:07 p.m. some of the broad research findings. You can find additional articles in the J. of the Amer. Med. Assoc., Amer. J. of Public Health, London School of Economics, Johns Hopkins Sch. of Public Health, Vanderbilt U. Research and News, Pew Research Center, Mayo Clinic Proceedings. You might want to read: “Guns, Public Health and Mental Illness: An Evidenced-Based Approach for Federal Policy.”
Comment by Former Hoosier Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:36 pm
Former Hoosier:
There’s a valid reason to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill. You can spout off all of the numbers you want about who is more likely to kill somebody but those arguments don’t diminish the fact that mentally ill people should not have legal access to firearms. To argue otherwise is ludicrous.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:44 pm
ISP doesn’t have the resources so they tell the local agencies it’s their resposiblity. They, in turn, say they don’t have the resources it’s ISPs resposiblity. So, 25,000 FOID revocations per year, how many additional law enforcement agents would you need to enforce this law? Just a side note for further horror, not all hospitals and mental health facilities will submit their records citing HIPPA laws. So the numbers are probably much higher.
Comment by Tuesday's Pizza Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:45 pm
Quick quiz-how many of you can even name the ISP Director?
Crickets?
Leo Schmitz, ex-CPD who appears to be retired on active duty. Mr. Director, get outta the bunker and redeploy some resources. Those 4 troopers I see every time I drive through Litchfield on I-55 could probably be cut in half without endangering the safety of the motoring public.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:01 pm
Demoralized: There is a valid reason to keep guns out of the hands of people who have known risk factors that may lead them to commit violent acts. Many of these “at risk” people do not have a mental illness. If your argument is that no person with any diagnosable mental illness should possess a gun, then you do not believe in facts. Knee jerk reactions about mental illness being a root cause of gun violence just doesn’t hold up when you read the research.
Comment by Former Hoosier Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:01 pm
===mental illness being a root cause of gun violence===
Strawman alert.
The law is about mental health professionals deeming people unfit to possess firearms.
Get over yourself.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:02 pm
==Knee jerk reactions about mental illness being a root cause of gun violence==
I love people who live in the world of academic arguments and are unable to bring themselves back to the realities of the world. Nobody is arguing that everyone with a mental illness is going to go out and kill somebody. But they are arguing - with good reason - that it’s probably not a good idea for the severely mentally ill to have a gun.
Get out of books and in to common sense.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:10 pm
=== This is the law of the land. They’re sworn to uphold those laws. ===
There are many laws of the land that aren’t being enforced or even implemented because of a lack of resources. The problem is getting worse because it’s easier for the legislators to vote for a new mandate than the funding to carryout the mandate.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:20 pm
This is not news. ISP has always done what they want to do and laws they don’t like won’t stop them from “doing what they want to do.” They have earned the title of “white line cops.” Drastically over paid tooooooooo.
Comment by Not news Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:22 pm
Tuesdays Pizza, the 25,000 number is the backlog, not the per year number.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:22 pm
Well said Demoralized!
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:25 pm
== CBH, according to Greg Hinz’s column yesterday, CPD has seized 6,252 illegal guns so far this year. ==
Yeah…a mere 25 of which were seized as a result of MH-revoked FOID. The CPD spokesperson’s statement makes it clear that they’re waiting for some of the others to come to the attention of law enforcement for other reasons through an alert list (and see if they have guns on them in public at that point) (rather than knocking on their doors to ask about what they’ve done with the guns they used to own).
Comment by crazybleedingheart Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:27 pm
== Get on it, folks. Now. ==
AND how do we suggest this be done?
Hadn’t realized that ISP was that fat on staffing.
Send another letter? Find these folks & do face to face interviews? Get search warrents when they say they don’t remember? After ya gave them notice to ‘better hide them real good’?
And ‘50,000′? Geez. Probly take longer than a week or two.
So, what’s the suggested plan?
Comment by sal-says Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:32 pm
– So, what’s the suggested plan?–
I’m pretty sure there is someone on the state payroll who “shall have the supreme executive power, and shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws.”
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:40 pm
- ISP Retired - Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 1:59 pm:
What is more important? Somebody talking on a cell phone, not wearing a seat belt, speeding or a mentally deranged person with a gun. The over paid ISP has made traffic offenses a number one priority. It shows police activity and its easy to write traffic citations, with very little problems. We have convicted Felons, people who have mental problems with firearms and nobody seems to care. (ISP RETIRED ” It is also against the law to speed or talk on the phone, there is no enforcement, cell phone use is now at same levels prior to the hands free law because people know they won’t be caught”. Who even cares if someone talks on a cell phone while driving. We are talking about people who should not have firearms.
Comment by Priority Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 5:25 pm
Sorry LBM. I was just saying that with current staffing levels for all agencies this task is impossible.
Comment by Tuesday's Pizza Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 5:32 pm
Priority
Who cares, how about the family when their loved one was killed because someone just couldn’t put the phone down, or the 4 families in Will County who lost loved ones because a trucker was speeding and rammed into several vehicles in a construction zone that’s who. You sound like the person who gets stopped for speeding and tells the officer “don’t you have something more important to do”. State Police , Highway Patrol, that’s what they do, traffic enforcement. My son was rear ended by a high school kid who was texting , he wasn’t hurt , but next time could have been.
Comment by ISP Retired Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 8:20 pm
Sorry, I love you all (and especially Rich) but this deal cannot be done by ISP. No way, no how.
There might be four cars seen on I-55 to make it look like the state is crawling with troopers- that is by design. Put cars where the most people see them so it looks like an omnipotent force but the truth is that it is an impotent force.
I know it seems like ISP has unlimited resources but it sure doesn’t. The district headquarters are empty. They are ghost towns. There are no assets to re-allocate.
Should ISP do this? Sure. Can they? No way.
Don’t kill the messengers folks.
Comment by Freezeup Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 8:52 pm
Freezeup and ISP
I’m in no way impugning the job ISP does in traffic control and I completely agree that their funding has been cut over the years. That being said this is that important that if it means pulling 2 out of what would be 4 cars than you do it. Cost benefit analysis appears to highlight this as the greater return. Also it doesn’t have to be a solely ISP operation. Is there a reason the county Sheriff’s office can’t serve the warrants with help from local pd?
It would seem to be the perfect opportunity for law enforcement to work together.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 9:09 pm
MB, lets walk through a normal manpower allocation for an ISP district. I’m going to assume that the four cars on I-55 are in District 9 based in Springfield. District 9 covers seven counties. Those 4 troopers that you see on the interstate are likely most or all of the cars “covering” seven counties. Seven. (Ask any sheriff in a non-interstate county if they ever see a trooper. He will laugh before he tells you “almost never”.) One or two of those four are probably commercial motor vehicle officers to CVEO’s. Their salary is paid by the federal DOT. ISP can’t afford to put them back on state payroll or worse yet lose funding provided by Feds for truck enforcement. CVEO’s duties are supposed to be almost exclusively truck enforcement so your force of four is now a force of one or two. As soon as any call happens, a crash, a disabled motorist, those cars are busy. Winter storm, bad weather, all are assigned to calls. You can assign them to FOID calls, but then the most basic functions will go unhandled.
Some of those four troopers are probably completing reports on the computer, completing computer based training. That kind of stuff used to be done in headquarters. Now you sit along the road to do it so people can see you.
I’m telling you that ISP does not have the headcount to do this stuff. Not even close. I can try to explain it but it is truly that simple. This ain’t your daddies ISP.
Comment by Freezeup Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 9:31 pm