The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 17, 2012, 09:34 PM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 4,761
"...plotting to shoot up a "Twilight" showing...."

Originally Posted by Question 12f on the federal 4473 Firearms Transaction Form:
Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes having been adjudicated incompetent
to manage your own affairs) or have you ever been committed to a mental institution?

> Blaec Lammers, 20, of Bolivar, followed a female clerk around a
> Walmart store in 2009, threatening her. He wasn't charged, but
> was committed for 96 hours for a mental health examination.
> Lammers, whose own mother turned him in Thursday, faces three
> felony charges in the alleged shooting plot.
> recently had purchased weapons -- two assault rifles and hundreds of bullets --
> that were similar to those used by a gunman who opened fire inside a theater in
> Aurora, Colo., during the latest Batman movie in July. That attack killed 12 people.
> Police wrote in the probable cause statement that Lammers was "off of his medication."

Read more:

I take it this kind of "commitment" doesn't count, AND somehow his actions/commitment in 2009 didn't raise any red flags?
mehavey is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 09:49 PM   #2
Join Date: July 11, 2012
Posts: 59
Mental health is the latest justification being pushed to revoke your right to keep and bear arms. Has anyone ever told you that you're crazy? Turn in all your guns, the college psych majors say you shouldn't have them anymore.
klyph3 is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 12:11 AM   #3
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,158
We don't really know enough about the nature of the commitment to comment. Generally, to be considered ineligible, a person has to have been committed by a judge or board of review, as part of a criminal sentence, or involuntarily.

For example, someone voluntarily checking themselves into rehab doesn't count.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 12:25 AM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
he didn't have to be 21 and was legal at twenty years of age. Being he was pretty young, it isn't unheqard of to be eligible...I think he can pretty much forget about being eligible to purchase firearms again though(however, I am not a legal expert & I could be wrong about this).

One thing is for sure(in my opinion), this guy will be on the streets again one way or the other and probably sooner than later. Unlike the aurora colorado gunman, things are different here. One needs to understand that...though is the way it is(sortof like how he was able to buy firearms in the first place(there is only so much 'someone' can do to prevent stuff)
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 09:49 AM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,068
We don't really know enough about the nature of the commitment to comment. Generally, to be considered ineligible, a person has to have been committed by a judge or board of review, as part of a criminal sentence, or involuntarily.

For example, someone voluntarily checking themselves into rehab doesn't count.


Could be he lied on the form 4473. Could be that no judge was involved in the 2009 incident. What is encouraging was his mother turning him in before he hurt anyone including himself.
2damnold4this is offline  
Old November 19, 2012, 01:38 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 2,251
Glad he got caught. Good on his mother for doing the right thing. I'm from the little Ozark town of Bolivar Mo (dont' live there now). He could have killed friends of mine, but as many old boys I know that carry there, he'd have probably been down before police ever showed up.
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither.
noelf2 is offline  
Old November 19, 2012, 11:14 PM   #7
44 AMP
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
There are lots of possibilites in English, and even though the words may be the same, the language used in law is different than what is used in the news, or in regular conversation.

For example, if you told a court you pulled up to the stop sign, and "waited a minute" before proceeding, you have just stated, under oath that you waited 60 seconds (no more, and no less) before proceeding.

Likewise, "committed" has a specific meaning in law. Being sent to a facility for observation for 72 (or 96, etc) hours does not mean "committed" in the sense of making you a prohibited person. And although a reporter is grammatically correct saying you were "committed", that's as far as they can go. By using that particular term, they are inferring, or implying something that is just not the legal definition.

Also, I very seriously doubt that Lammers purchased actual assault rifles. Assault rifles are select fire, and as such, by Federal law are machine guns. What he purchased might be assault weapons (as defined in law, semiautomatic firearms with certain combinations of specific features), which happened to be rifles.

Since he was under 21, but over 18, was not a convicted felon, nor had any conviction for domestic violence, and had not been "committed" in the legal sense (by a judge) as far as I can tell, he was not a prohibited person under the law, and therefore, had every right to buy what he did, and broke no law doing so.

That being said, even though he broke no law getting weapons, and didn't actually use them, his plans to use them consititute threats, and might also fall under some of the anti-terrorist laws as well.

Tell your Mom or your friends you want to shoot up a movie house, and its either BS and blown off, or someone gets seriously worried. Tell the cops the same thing, and its making a threat and (if even remotely creditable) gets you arrested, and the system goes to work.

I'm glad his Mom took it seriously enough to involve the authorities, because based on what they determined (as reported), he was a creditable threat to the public.

Based on the reports, he is a very disturbed young man, and we will all benefit (him included) from his being stopped before he was able to actually carry out his twisted dreams.
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11161 seconds with 9 queries