A week ago, Steven Kazmierczak walked into Tony’s Guns & Ammo, a yellow shop in a back yard near the University of Illinois, and bought a Remington shotgun and a 9 mm Glock pistol.
Around the same time, family members noticed that Kazmierczak was acting “erratically,” after he had stopped taking prescription medicines for anxiety.
Kazmierczak used his two new guns, and two more he had also purchased legally, to kill five students and himself Thursday in a shooting rampage at Northern Illinois University that leaves policymakers again scrambling to figure out how they can stop the carnage.
In the wake of April’s massacre at Virginia Tech, in which a student with a history of mental problems bought guns that he used to kill 32 people and then himself, lawmakers in Washington and across the nation looked for ways to prevent unstable people from getting guns.
It remains unclear exactly what Kazmierczak’s mental state was at the time of the shooting, and it is even less certain whether Illinois’ new law on reporting mental illness, one of the toughest in the nation, would have made any difference.
But the shootings and the legislative response raise two of the nation’s most controversial subjects — gun control and the rights of the mentally ill — in a volatile combination, further inflamed by the horror and outrage surrounding the killings.
Congress passed a law in December that forces states to report mental health information that is placed in a background-check system used nationally for gun permits.
Illinois legislators went further, crafting an ambitious attempt to keep guns out of the hands of people with a mental illness.
When the new state law takes effect June 1, health professionals in Illinois will be required to report to the Department of Human Services any patient “whose mental condition is of such a nature that it is manifested by violent, suicidal, threatening or assaultive behavior” — the kind of reporting that previously took place only when a person was admitted to a mental health institution.
Shared with police
That information will be shared with the Illinois State Police, who will immediately flag the name so the person cannot be issued a gun permit. Police also will use the information to confiscate the guns of the people in question.
But state officials acknowledge the new system will not be foolproof.
Some health professionals, in particular, say they are uncomfortable with the reporting burden the law shifts onto their shoulders.
“It’s always been a challenge to think that individual mental health practitioners could be a part of some greater surveillance system,” said Dr. Peter Nierman, medical director of Chicago Lakeshore, a psychiatric hospital on the city’s North Side.
Nierman acknowledges health professionals’ duty to their patients to warn them when they are at risk. But alerting the state, he said, falls outside a physician’s purview.
“It would seem like a registry for people who have seen a psychiatrist for a private and personal matter,” he said of the state databases.
State lawmakers say they need to go to those lengths to deter mass violence.
State Sen. Dan Kotowski (D-Park Ridge) sponsored the new reporting bill, saying it was seen as a reasonable way to address the potentially “dangerous and terribly potent mix” of mentally ill people and firearms.
“We can’t take anything for granted anymore as far as keeping ourselves safe, and it’s very disturbing,” he said.
At Loyola University Chicago, employees of the Wellness Center have met with attorneys to discuss how they will respond to the changes in Illinois’ gun law and maintain a delicate balance.
“We want to protect the privacy of our clients as much as we can,” said Diane Asaro, director of the center. “However, Loyola is going to look to follow whatever law is passed and required of us. Those kinds of discussions are still ongoing.”
Asaro said there has to be a careful balance between protecting privacy rights and keeping the campus safe.
“You will have to look at how the law is written and how seriously a person is ill. How sick does someone have to be for us to report something?” she said.
At the University of Illinois, dean of students William Riley said if a student is perceived to be a danger to others, the first priority would be to remove the student from campus — not to report him to the state.
More Top Picks Blue
University of Illinois officials would not disclose whether Kazmierczak, a student there this year, received counseling through the school, citing health privacy laws. But students can be forced to withdraw from classes if they have severe mental health concerns.
“We wouldn’t see our primary response to report them to the state so they couldn’t buy a gun,” Riley said. “I would be more concerned if they should stay in our community environment.”
Health professionals worry not only about stigmatizing patients but also threatening their livelihoods.
“If someone is an outpatient and put on anti-psychotic meds — which is what commonly happens — does he automatically go onto some ‘Do Not Sell’ list?” wondered Bernard Heilicser, an emergency-room physician at Ingalls Memorial Hospital in Harvey. “And what are the ramifications for doctors? Will the response be to report more because of potential liability if the patient goes out and does something? Or will the doc be hesitant to deny someone their ability to obtain a gun?”
Gary Slutkin, head of the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention at the University of Illinois at Chicago, worries not only about who is doing the reporting, but whether the right people get the message.
“Whether the guy had mental illness or not, there’s almost always some warning that is provided to someone else,” he said. “And so this is almost always preventable.”
Slutkin believes the reason these shootings are not prevented is because those who receive the warning signs don’t know what to do with them.
Involving police could get the student in unnecessary legal trouble. Notifying a university could impact the student’s standing at the school. Yet simply encouraging a person with mental health problems to seek help may not be enough.
“What we’ve learned is there’s a gap in the strategy,” Slutkin said. “There’s always someone who’s being alerted, and the alerting is simply not subtle. But they don’t feel they can do anything about it.”
As a possible solution on college campuses, Slutkin suggests an anonymous tip line that would alert people trained in dealing with mental health issues.
“You’d need a hot line so people know that if you are concerned or are aware of someone who is having violent tendencies or ideation, call here,” Slutkin said. “Then what you have is a service with very highly trained people who could respond.”
Still, in the end, overwhelmed mental health services nationally can only do so much and they wonder whether more rigorous reporting systems will help.
“There will always be the student the system doesn’t catch,” said Sherry Benton, director of the University of Florida counseling center, who has researched mental illness among college students. “We’ve kind of lost the taboo about violence on campus.
“Once it happens, it makes it more feasible for someone else to do it,” she said. “And being angry and suicidal, they will find the guns to do it.”
If so, merely reporting potentially dangerous students may someday not be enough.
Metal detectors?
While it may seem unfeasible, plans are being circulated around college campuses to possibly install metal detectors at large halls and key buildings such as libraries.
“It’s one way to reduce the risk and there’s a lot of discussion about it,” said Kevin Thompson, a criminal justice professor at North Dakota State University. “If you can’t keep the guns out of the hands of troubled people, you will want to try to keep the guns out of campus buildings.”
But many experts scoff at the idea of locked-down college campuses and prison-like fences and security.
“Can you imagine the long lines of people waiting to get past metal detectors and into classes?” asked James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston.
– – –
Buying a gun in Illinois
With few exceptions, in order to buy a gun or ammunition in Illinois, you must comply with all of the following:
1. Apply for and obtain a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card issued by state police. It’s valid for five years.
2. Be at least 18 to buy a shotgun or rifle, or be at least 21 to buy any other gun.
3. Pass an instant background check conducted by state police serving as the conduit to the FBI.
IF YOUR BACKGROUND CHECK COMES BACK FINE
By state law, you have to wait three days to purchase a handgun, two days to purchase a long gun.
IF YOUR BACKGROUND CHECK COMES BACK MARKED ‘DELAYED’
If your background check is not instantly approved or denied, authorities will get back to the dealer within three days with a final answer. If no additional word comes by then, the gun sale may proceed, and you may obtain the gun after the Illinois waiting periods are obeyed.
SELECTED ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS
– A record of every firearm sale is reported to the state or local government.
– There are restrictions on the types of firearms and ammunition that can be sold in Illinois.
– The following cities have banned handguns: Chicago, Evanston, Oak Park, Morton Grove, Winnetka, Wilmette and Highland Park.
– All guns in Chicago must be registered.
– Carrying a concealed weapon in Illinois is prohibited.
More Top Picks Baby Carrier
SOURCES: National Rifle Association, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
TRIBUNE GRAPHIC
———-