I will say that there were obvious concerns, when it came out that Cho had gone through psychiatric treatment before, and there were a plethora of notes on file of his being listed as unstable and a danger to himself and others.

There were already rules on the books in Virginia (a very second-amendment-friendly state) that say if you’ve been committed to a mental institution for psychiatric therapy (inpatient) that it would be a red flag on your gun background check.

The fact that Cho had only been recommended for OUTPATIENT treatment, it didn’t show up. I believe closing THAT little loophole might not be a bad idea.

But simply closing that loophole would (should) make NO CHANGE to how the Doctors diagnose their patients, but simply how that information is reported to NCIS.

However, this bill looks like it goes a little further than that, without even really addressing the issue. They make it a Interstate communications issue, when Cho’s situation had nothing to do with that.

The debate given the Cho situation (and there should be a debate, and none of this “fast tracking” nonsense) should be nothing more than: Should someone committed to OUTPATIENT psychotherapy who has been designated by a psychiatrist as a danger to himself and others be barred from having a gun.

My hunch is yes, but as usual, Congress throws together and pushes through a bill that does little of what they intend it to do, and instead throws together pet projects.