I believe I've been going about this the wrong way.
It is obviously important that the mentally ill (or even just the mentally queasy) be kept away from guns. It's not just for the violence that they might do to other people, but also what injury they might do to themselves.
So that's why Delaware legislators passed "universal" background checks and tried to pass a bill to keep firearms away from people with signs of mental illness.
Now, let's suppose there was a definable sub-population of Americans--say about 1,000,000 people--who had the following characteristics:
1. They attempted or committed suicide at more than twice the national average.
2. About 23-25% of them were known to have serious drinking problems.
3. They have a history of higher than average domestic abuse rates.
4. They tend to be involved in shooting fatalities at a rate as much as ten times higher than even highly urban populations.
5. As a group they are highly resistant to seeking any treatment for mental health issues.
6. 100% of them own handguns; a high percentage own multiple weapons with high-capacity magazines.
I would bet that, given these facts, many Delaware legislators would favor crafting a new law to make it more difficult for these folks to purchase or own a firearm.
Except that I'd be wrong.
You see, our lawmakers carved a specific exemption in the "universal" background checks to give these individuals access to firearms with no such checks, and did not even consider them as a group in the mental health legislation.
They're police officers and retired police officers.
And you can read about their mental health issues (for a start) here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Maybe "pistol" Pete Schwarzkopf should think about dealing with access to guns considering the mental health, suicide, alcohol, and domestic violence problems in the law enforcement community before he starts going after other folks.