What if Romney is right about illegal purchases?

Various media stories are ridiculing Mitt Romney for saying that Colorado shooter James Holmes illegally acquired weapons:

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Wednesday said many of the weapons obtained by the shooting suspect in Colorado were obtained illegally and that changing laws won’t prevent gun-related tragedies.

Holmes broke no laws when he purchased an assault-style rifle, a shotgun and Glock handgun, and he passed the required background checks.

Is that true? That depends on his mental health history, as well as whether he was a habitual user of illegal drugs.

From the news reports I’ve seen, two things are clear:

1. He bought the guns quite recently; and

2. He was apparently a regular user of illegal drugs.

I say “apparently” because the Vicodin tablets found in his possession and that he admits to taking may or may not have been legally prescribed. If the drug was not prescribed for him legally and if he was using it habitually, then he would have had to lie on the official form which all gun purchasors are required to fill out before they purchase a firearm in any gun store.

ATF form 4473:

e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

The answer to that ought to be pretty straightforward. If he was an illegal user of either marijuana or Vicodin (or any other drug for which he lacked a prescription), that would make his gun purchases illegal and would make him a gun criminal even before the shooting. Now that they have him in custody, it would of course be an easy thing to determine whether he was a habitual user: simply get a warrant to test a sample of his hair.

As others have pointed out, the same was also true of Jared Loughner, but this did not stop the gun-grabbers from solemnly declaring that he purchased his guns legally.

Interestingly, according to the ATF, even medical marijuana patients are not exempt:

…anyone who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance and is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition…

There is also the possibility that he was receiving treatment for mental illness and that this was not properly reported. If that turns out to be the case, it might have been another factor in determining whether his gun purchases were legal.

At any rate, he would have had to answer this question on the official form 4473:

f. 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?

Without getting into the question of whether these laws are effective (much less whether we need more), it seems to me that it isn’t fair to cast Romney as a clueless idiot when he seems to have raised a perfectly valid legal question.

Strict laws exist which make it a federal felony to lie on Form 4473, and if Holmes lied, then he committed a felony and his guns were illegal.

So I have a couple of questions.

Why is the army of media fact checkers so quick to say the guy broke no laws?

And if Romney turns out to have gotten this right, will apologies be forthcoming?