Can the VA prevent Veterans from possessing fire arms.. the very people that fought

[Bigfoot]

This is the same as the misdemeanor domestic violence restriction that has almost no effect on aiding domestic violence but a great effect on aiding gun control. Just another government shuffle.

 

[Bigfoot]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

You beat me to it.

The very first part of the first sentence which is at the beginning of the highlighted red box states:

A determination of incompetency will prevent you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.
​

Now, considering the sheer number of Veteran suicides that have reached epidemic proportions in recent months and years, is the desire of conservatives to score cheap political points SO OVERWHELMINGLY important to them as to supersede the importance of trying to prevent combat veterans who may be suffering from both PTSD and depression from possibly taking their own lives?

Is that how low the conservatives movement has sunk to in their individual and collective desire to lash out at President Obama?

The story in the OP makes it seem as if random vets are being targeted and that a simple piece of paper is denying them the right to own a gun. Obviously that's not the case and this is about more than just firearms. The vet's doctor alerts the VA, that he or she feels the vet is mentally unsound, then an investigation is done, and a hearing is held. The vet can either agree to the findings or they can fight it. If they fight it and lose they can appeal.

If they lose, a family member is put in charge of the vets finances until such a time that the vet is deemed sound enough to care for themselves and they go on the no buy list until such a time as well.

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

 

[Erand7899]

I'll reserve judgement until I see some credible sources.

It's real. The problem is that the OP leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency, NOT veterans. It's just another in a string of "lies of omission".

If competency is the basic requirement to own firearms, we should immediately disarm all liberal/socialists. Sane people could not possibly believe the nonsense that these people believe.

Joking aside, competency comes in many degrees, just like criminality, and all other negative personal traits. American citizens should only be prohibited the right to keep and bear firearms, if a court of law has determined that they are a danger to themselves or others.

I, for one, do not want any bureaucrat, doctor, or any other non-accountable person making the determination about who is, or who is not competent to keep and bear arms.

 

[konradv]

I'll reserve judgement until I see some credible sources.

It's real. The problem is that the OP leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency, NOT veterans. It's just another in a string of "lies of omission".

You said I " leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency,"

Obviously you aren't "competent" yourself at reading comprehension!!!

"It appears Coburn will give up that effort, but seek to add the amendment to some other bill.
At issue is whether a veteran who has been found unable to handle his or her financial affairs should have the right to own a gun. "

So I read "veteran" Unable (competent) own a gun"

Where is this a LIE?? WHERE DID I LEAVE ANYTHING OUT??

It's about competency. The only reason veterans are mentioned is because it's a VA action. GET IT?!?! You're trying to LIE and say that they're trying to take guns away from vets. That's pretty sleazy, but par for course where you're concerned.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S."

Read more: Napolitano stands by controversial report - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
​

Fits perfectly.
​

Fits Tim McVeigh perfectly.

 

[S.J.]

"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S."

Read more: Napolitano stands by controversial report - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
​

Fits perfectly.
​

Fits Tim McVeigh perfectly.

Where would you libs be without Tim McVeigh?

 

[konradv]

"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S."

Read more: Napolitano stands by controversial report - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
​

Fits perfectly.
​

Fits Tim McVeigh perfectly.

Where would you libs be without Tim McVeigh?

He's the gift that keeps on giving, especially when someone responds and bumps the thread. Thanks.

 

[AmyNation]

You beat me to it.

The very first part of the first sentence which is at the beginning of the highlighted red box states:

A determination of incompetency will prevent you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.
​

Now, considering the sheer number of Veteran suicides that have reached epidemic proportions in recent months and years, is the desire of conservatives to score cheap political points SO OVERWHELMINGLY important to them as to supersede the importance of trying to prevent combat veterans who may be suffering from both PTSD and depression from possibly taking their own lives?

Is that how low the conservatives movement has sunk to in their individual and collective desire to lash out at President Obama?

The story in the OP makes it seem as if random vets are being targeted and that a simple piece of paper is denying them the right to own a gun. Obviously that's not the case and this is about more than just firearms. The vet's doctor alerts the VA, that he or she feels the vet is mentally unsound, then an investigation is done, and a hearing is held. The vet can either agree to the findings or they can fight it. If they fight it and lose they can appeal.

If they lose, a family member is put in charge of the vets finances until such a time that the vet is deemed sound enough to care for themselves and they go on the no buy list until such a time as well.

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isnt sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

 

[Bigfoot]

The story in the OP makes it seem as if random vets are being targeted and that a simple piece of paper is denying them the right to own a gun. Obviously that's not the case and this is about more than just firearms. The vet's doctor alerts the VA, that he or she feels the vet is mentally unsound, then an investigation is done, and a hearing is held. The vet can either agree to the findings or they can fight it. If they fight it and lose they can appeal.

If they lose, a family member is put in charge of the vets finances until such a time that the vet is deemed sound enough to care for themselves and they go on the no buy list until such a time as well.

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isn't sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

Four letters and take away their God given Rights for a lifetime. This isn't about the presence or lack of presence of mental competency. I know plenty of guys who have had PTSD in some degree or another and they go to work everyday and raise families. Hell, I might have it. The mentally ill and incompetent sure no guns. PTSD alone to what degree? If you want to cite common sense use some. This is about gun control.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The story in the OP makes it seem as if random vets are being targeted and that a simple piece of paper is denying them the right to own a gun. Obviously that's not the case and this is about more than just firearms. The vet's doctor alerts the VA, that he or she feels the vet is mentally unsound, then an investigation is done, and a hearing is held. The vet can either agree to the findings or they can fight it. If they fight it and lose they can appeal.

If they lose, a family member is put in charge of the vets finances until such a time that the vet is deemed sound enough to care for themselves and they go on the no buy list until such a time as well.

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isnt sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

For the slow and STUPID. In order to deny 2nd Amendment rights due to incompetency one must go before a JUDGE, receive their day in court. The VA does not now nor ever had the power to arbitrarily remove such rights. THAT is the LAW. FEDERAL LAW.

As for finances one can be ruled incompetent on financial matters by a Bureaucrat not a Judge. It is an administrative function that does not require a Court room. You can bet if I got a letter like that I would be suing the Government as it is ILLEGAL.

 

[AmyNation]

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isn't sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

Four letters and take away their God given Rights for a lifetime. This isn't about the presence or lack of presence of mental competency. I know plenty of guys who have had PTSD in some degree or another and they go to work everyday and raise families. Hell, I might have it. The mentally ill and incompetent sure no guns. PTSD alone to what degree? If you want to cite common sense use some. This is about gun control.

It's not for a lifetime.

 

[AmyNation]

That is such bullshit. If PSTD is on their record the government is holding it against them with no concern for the PSTD. It's about gun control. My father had screaming nightmares all of his life after the war and all he did was work and hunt. I sometimes have nightmares as well and my guns have never hurt anyone nor do I ever think that they will. This is not about helping Vets. this is about gun control.

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isnt sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

For the slow and STUPID. In order to deny 2nd Amendment rights due to incompetency one must go before a JUDGE, receive their day in court. The VA does not now nor ever had the power to arbitrarily remove such rights. THAT is the LAW. FEDERAL LAW.

As for finances one can be ruled incompetent on financial matters by a Bureaucrat not a Judge. It is an administrative function that does not require a Court room. You can bet if I got a letter like that I would be suing the Government as it is ILLEGAL.

Did you miss the part where I explained the process?

If the VA finds them imcompentent, they can either agree, or contest. If they contest and lose they can appeal. If they do so, they can do it with an attorney, in front of a judge.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Someone who had been diagnosed with PTSD shouldn't own a gun. This is common sense stuff and this encompasses way more than the ability to legally own a firearm. This is about their finances and making sure someone who isnt sound isn't destroying their credit and life while they get treatment.

For the slow and STUPID. In order to deny 2nd Amendment rights due to incompetency one must go before a JUDGE, receive their day in court. The VA does not now nor ever had the power to arbitrarily remove such rights. THAT is the LAW. FEDERAL LAW.

As for finances one can be ruled incompetent on financial matters by a Bureaucrat not a Judge. It is an administrative function that does not require a Court room. You can bet if I got a letter like that I would be suing the Government as it is ILLEGAL.

Did you miss the part where I explained the process?

If the VA finds them imcompentent, they can either agree, or contest. If they contest and lose they can appeal. If they do so, they can do it with an attorney, in front of a judge.

Federal law requires that before one be stripped of their Constitutional right to bear arm they be given a day in Court. The VA can not simply send a letter saying it is done and leaving it to the member to complain.

Or does Obama somehow trump even US Law?

If the VA feels a veteran is unstable it must order a Court hearing before a Judge, it can not simply send a form letter stripping them of their rights and say ohh ya you can appeal.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

for our rights under the Constitution in the 2nd Amendment???

This must be Barack Obama’s way of thanking our veterans for serving.
US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both.

View attachment 24588

SHOCK REPORT ? Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms | The Gateway Pundit

People suffering from certain mental issues should not possess firearms. Whether they served in the military is not an important sidtinction.

 

[g5000]

for our rights under the Constitution in the 2nd Amendment???

This must be Barack Obama’s way of thanking our veterans for serving.
US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both.

View attachment 24588

SHOCK REPORT ? Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms | The Gateway Pundit

Of course you never even noticed they are not showing you the complete letter in your source article. It never occurred to you to wonder what they are omitting from their story, did it.

Hmmmm...

 

[g5000]

You can read the entire VA letter here: http://redflagnews.com/s/VA-letter-Copy-by-RedFlag-News.pdf

Note that it refers to the Brady Bill. This has NOTHING to do with Obama. It has to do with a law that was passed in 1994.

Read the whole fucking letter, idiots.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

For the slow and STUPID. In order to deny 2nd Amendment rights due to incompetency one must go before a JUDGE, receive their day in court. The VA does not now nor ever had the power to arbitrarily remove such rights. THAT is the LAW. FEDERAL LAW.

As for finances one can be ruled incompetent on financial matters by a Bureaucrat not a Judge. It is an administrative function that does not require a Court room. You can bet if I got a letter like that I would be suing the Government as it is ILLEGAL.

Did you miss the part where I explained the process?

If the VA finds them imcompentent, they can either agree, or contest. If they contest and lose they can appeal. If they do so, they can do it with an attorney, in front of a judge.

Federal law requires that before one be stripped of their Constitutional right to bear arm they be given a day in Court. The VA can not simply send a letter saying it is done and leaving it to the member to complain.

Or does Obama somehow trump even US Law?

If the VA feels a veteran is unstable it must order a Court hearing before a Judge, it can not simply send a form letter stripping them of their rights and say ohh ya you can appeal.

Are you reading the law?

The individual can waive their day in court or they can contest the findings.

Nothing wrong with any of that.

Some folks should not possess weapons.

 

[g5000]

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Possession of a Firearm by the Mentally Ill

The VA letter in the OP was sent to someone in Oregon, so here is Oregon law:

No person shall possess a firearm if he or she:

Was committed to the Oregon Health Authority under ORS 426.130;

Was found to be mentally ill and subject to an order under ORS 426.130 that the person be prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm as a result of that mental illness; or

Has been found guilty except for insanity under ORS 161.295 of a felony.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Possession of a Firearm by the Mentally Ill

The VA letter in the OP was sent to someone in Oregon, so here is Oregon law:

No person shall possess a firearm if he or she:

Was committed to the Oregon Health Authority under ORS 426.130;

Was found to be mentally ill and subject to an order under ORS 426.130 that the person be prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm as a result of that mental illness; or

Has been found guilty except for insanity under ORS 161.295 of a felony.

The only way one can be adjudicated is by a Judge. The only way one can be committed against their will is by a Judge. As I stated. A form letter from the VA can not strip one of their rights.

Further the mere fact one is told they are incompetent with their finances does not mean they are adjudicated to be mental unfit to possess firearms.

 

[Agit8r]

It's a national tragedy that so many soldiers are coming back in bad shape. i suspect that this is a stopgap measure to keep suicides from going up once sequesters cut their mental health funding :[