6th Circuit lifts part of federal gun law

Clifford Charles Tyler, now 73-years-old, had emotional problems in 1986 following a divorce and the court ordered him to get treatment. He complied and was released from treatment a month later.

Fast-forward 28 years and he’s not allowed to buy a firearm because of that one month out of his life. So he took it to court. He lives in Michigan which hasn’t taken advantage of a federal program to form a “relief from disabilities” system so Cliff can prove that he is no longer emotionally disturbed. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to prevent Mr. Tyler from buying a gun according to the Wall Street Journal;

In other words, wrote Judge Boggs: “[W]hether Tyler may exercise his right to bear arms depends on whether his state of residence has chosen to accept the carrot of federal grant money and has implemented a relief program.… An individual’s ability to exercise a fundamental right necessary to our system of ordered liberty cannot turn on such a distinction.”

In the article, one 2d Amendment expert expects that this will open up other portions of federal gun control laws to judicial scrutiny.

While I agree that there should be relief for folks that are no longer troubled, I also think that there are too many escape hatches for people who are unbalanced. We’ve seen the results countless times in the last few years in Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut and just this week in Pennsylvania to name a few.

The problem, of course, isn’t the Cliff Tylers of this country, it’s the people who need to be banned from buying weapons and their names aren’t placed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System because local police and prosecutors aren’t willing to make the system an effective tool. That’s why politicians are more willing to ban guns outright because that’s easier than making the government do it’s job. It takes less thought and makes the issue emotional.

Category: Guns