Obiwan
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2015
- 12,153
- 10,044
- Thread starter
- #341
Which opens up another can of worms, since the VA is making these determinations WITHOUT going before the courts...You don't end up with a fiduciary trustee without a court finding you mentally deficient and appointing one to you.Be specific explain how a bureaucracy nameless and faceless knows the facts and weighs them and gives the accused an opportunity to defend ones self? As opposed to say a Judge in a Court of Law? Then remind us how you are just fine with no legal procedures removing rights of US Citizens then explain what happens when those rights are yours they are removing at some future juncturewhat makes a judge competent in deciding if someone is mentally deficient?Well except for the LEGAL requirement that before one LOSE a protected right ONE MUST BE so adjudged by competent authority which MEANS a JUDGE not a bureaucracy.kind of bringing things back to the op - this isn't a new thing. the mental incompetence rule has been in place since 1968. the va is recognized, legally, as being able to make that determination.
why would anyone want the mentally incompetent to have greater access to guns?
That's another unilateral action by the VA which, according to you, is illegal....