cwtcr hokie wrote:The documents, first revealed by The Associated Press, were provided by a psychological assessment service initiated by Cruz's mother called Henderson Behavioral Health. The documents showed a high school resource officer who was also a sheriff's deputy and two school counselors recommended in September 2016 that Cruz be committed for mental evaluation under Florida's Baker Act. That law allows for involuntary commitment for mental health examination for at least three days.
Such an involuntary commitment also would have been a high obstacle if not a complete barrier to legally obtaining a firearm, such as the AR-15 rifle used in the Stoneman Douglas massacre on Feb. 14, authorities said.
There is no evidence Cruz was ever committed. Coincidentally, the school resource officer who recommended that Cruz be "Baker Acted" was Scot Peterson — the same Broward Sheriff's Office deputy who resigned amid accusations he failed to respond to the shooting by staying outside the building where the killings occurred.
David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor, said that an involuntary commitment would have been a huge red flag had Cruz attempted to buy a firearm legally.
"If he had lied, hopefully the verification of the form would have pulled up the commitment paperwork," Weinstein said.
The documents did not say why Cruz was not committed under the Baker Act or whether he may not have qualified for other reasons. The law allows a law enforcement officer such as Peterson to initiate commitment under the Baker Act.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/18/so ... -show.html
Yep, the commitment you so love to tout. And why it is so difficult to actually implement. Which is why the GVRO is gaining such steam nationally. It would actually be effective.[/quote]
my question is since they could not get a involuntary commitment done even tho several people were calling for it how would you get a GRVO accomplished? Also I believe the family he lived with owned at least one gun also so are you taking every firearm out of the residence?
Yes a GRVO is brilliant if it is a person that lives alone and nobody else has any property in his residence, otherwise it has many issues[/quote]
Because involuntary mental commitment is a very high bar. GVRO is not as high a bar.[/quote]
what about the other questions, this FL guy lived in a house with another family, so in a GVRO are you taking every weapon in the residence, sorry no way I can agree to that[/quote]
No you don't. Probably require them to be locked up when not in use.[/quote]
in the fl case the guy that owned the property made the kid lock up his guns in the gun safe and per the guy the kid was not supposed to have the combo... we see how well that worked, so yes the GRVO would be great in special situations but would not work worth a crap in most of them as not many nutjobs live all by themselves it seems like[/quote]
More like it "might" not have worked in this singular situation. Don't know for sure.