No-The main way to find out is to tell the truth on the government form and then accepting their decision if you agree with it, or seeking legal help if you don’t.
Do we need to be concerned that the OP wants to buy a firearm so soon after receiving psychiatric care?
I read the local police and 911 logs for my area daily and I do notice that failure of a NICS background check is reported to the local police agency. I do not know if anything else is done about it, but it is logged.
Perhaps a felon trying to buy a gun is a crime. Failure for other reasons is probably not.
Yeah, sorry I wasn’t criticizing you or anyone in general; more like a PSA for the OP, lol.
Carry on
It is reported but many times nothing comes from it. It’s one of those gun laws a lot of people are Jonesing for but what good is a law that isn’t fully enforced?
Attempting to buy/possess a firearm when you are prohibited is a crime regardless of why you are prohibited.
There are near hits and false positives, but a person that isn’t prohibited can appeal a denial.
It’s not quite that simple, though. Form 4473 doesn’t ask the applicant to write an essay about themselves, or provide a lengthy and detailed medical and psychiatric history. It just has a series of YES/NO questions, one of which is:
If the applicant checks the “YES” box, no one is going to run a mental health background check anyway and then come back with “Oh, hey, we ran your records, and it turns out you misinterpreted what happened to you when you were still a minor–you’re actually not a prohibited person after all!” If the applicant checks the “YES” box, then the process simply stops right there, at the counter of the gun store.
The question, then, is whether or not this particular applicant checking the “NO” box on question 21.f is a lie, or not.
The OP wants to find answers. This doesn’t answer the question at all, the OP doesn’t know what the truth is. There is no “decision” involved either, either it comes back with a go-ahead or a reject. The FFL is not legally or qualified to make mental health decisions, beyond being able to refuse transactions for non-discriminatory reasons.
Yes exactly, OP is asking whether they are considered to have been committed. They can answer Yes, and in that case assume they’re prohibited, or can answer No, which might get a good result or a very bad one.
As has been said, the problem is that the OP doesn’t know what the truth is. He doesn’t know whether the circumstances of his hospitalization qualify as involuntary or voluntary. Until he knows that, he can’t tell what answer would be truthful. Considering the potential serious consequences, “checking” by filling out the form would be a terrible idea. He needs to find out what’s correct before filling out the form.
The OP has a unique situation. I am empathetic to their confusion.
But you’d be surprised at how many people who have been convicted of armed robbery, burglary, etc who are not aware whether or not they can possess a firearm. Or they think the whole thing went away because it was years ago like a traffic violation does.
Minors can be involuntarily psychiatrized not on the basis that’s required to force services on adults (a determination of being dangerous to self or others or, in some cases, also ‘gravely disabled’), but also simply because their parents opt to consent FOR them.
“Put me in” implies it was the parents’ choice not the determination of the psychiatric system that the person “needed” it in the sense of imposing it on an involuntary basis.
As such, that means their decision to do so is on par with them grounding you for a month — they’re the parents and they get to do with you as they see fit, within the parameters of parental responsibility and protection clauses against child abuse — and a consequence of that is that childhood psych records are generally not available. Not (just so you know) that adult psychiatric records are as organized and available to The System as arrest and conviction records, for that matter.
I would consult a mental hygiene legal services attorney, one who specializes in psychiatric patients’ rights. Other than that additional specification, yeah, what Colibri said.