What constitutes an abuse of power? Just ask Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), who seems determined to make the practice of imposing holds on legislation a veritable art form. Coburn, who currently has holds on about 100, recently set his sights on the National Instant Criminal Background Check Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, which would improve the federal government's ability to prevent the mentally ill from buying guns-a group already prohibited from purchasing firearms. The bill enjoys bipartisan support in both houses of Congress and is endorsed by the National Rifle Association.Coburn's opposition to the bill is a curious, though by no means uncharacteristic, sentiment. He claims the legislation is inadequately funded because it doesn't include cuts to other programs, and further, that it risks infringing on the rights of veterans' or other citizens' Second Amendment rights if they have been "unfairly tagged" as mentally unstable. Never mind that Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the NRA, has said "there is not one person legally able to buy a firearm today who would be banned under the new law," a most accurate assessment. Coburn has historically opposed most spending bills, although the $400 million the Senate bill calls for is a veritable pittance by congressional standards. In his zealotry to safeguard gun rights, however, Coburn goes too far. It appears that he views any restriction on the an individual -no matter how depraved, unstable, or undeserving-to purchase a gun as a possible threat to that right for the rest of us.

Even the NRA disagrees with Coburn here, rightly pointing out that the bill not only clarifies and improves upon existing legislation, but also that it "would allow some people now unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to have their names removed from the instant check system."

This legislation is particularly notable given the source of its inspiration: Seung-Hui Cho, the perpetrator of April's horrific shootings at Virginia Polytechnic Institute who was able to buy guns because Virginia failed to inform the national background check system that he had been ordered to undergo mental health treatment. Had the system been properly informed, Cho would have been barred from purchasing those weapons.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, our school moved to prevent acts of violence by announcing that the police would be armed; Congress, to its credit, has done the right thing by crafting legislation that would address this issue at its source.

Alas, a hold is a tricky thing. Essentially the Senate hold allows a single senator to prevent a bill from coming to vote on the floor, usually to address a certain issue or to force a compromise. While this can be a useful tool, Coburn seems to reach for it far too often and has a penchant for placing holds on bills completely undeserving of such obstacles. Sometimes this tendency can be downright comical-he recently placed a hold on a Senate version of a House bill that passed 417-0. It seems that Coburn is either abusing his privilege or, at the very least, views himself as some kind of heroic last line of defense against increased spending of any kind, for any reason whatsoever. Such hubris is frightening, particularly considering the level-headedness, widespread appeal and bureaucratic efficiency embodied in this particular bill that he appears so intent on delaying. While Coburn postpones, the next Seung-Hui Cho could be planning on buying a firearm and going berserk.

Common sense must abide here. The mentally ill should not be able to exploit this apparent loophole and purchase guns. This is self-evident. If an individual has been diagnosed as mentally unstable, then he should not be able to buy a weapon. This is also self-evident. Coburn should consider both the immediate and long-term consequences of continuing his hold on this crucial legislation as weeks pass and the loophole remains.