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

[rdean]

Can the VA prevent Veterans from possessing fire arms..

What the fuck kind of question is that?

 

[S.J.]

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 :[

This isn't about stopping suicide among veterans, this is about disarming veterans and you know it.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

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 :[

This isn't about stopping suicide among veterans, this is about disarming veterans and you know it.

This is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

 

[S.J.]

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 :[

this isn't about stopping suicide among veterans, this is about disarming veterans and you know it.

this is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

bullshit!

 

[Agit8r]

this isn't about stopping suicide among veterans, this is about disarming veterans and you know it.

this is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

bullshit!

yes, and the next paragraph is to get them ready for the coming communist rationing, right?

 

[S.J.]

this is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

bullshit!

yes, and the next paragraph is to get them ready for the coming communist rationing, right?

Take guns away from everyone who know is willing and able to use them to defend their freedom.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

You obviously didn’t read the letter linked in post 36.

The letter clearly explains that no adverse action will be taken until the veteran has an opportunity to present evidence on his behalf. The letter also outlines the hearing the veteran is entitled to prior to any determination, including the ability to posses a firearm.

It is indeed sad and telling the way conservatives feel the need to lie, omit, and distort facts and evidence to contrive a controversy where none exists.

 

[FA_Q2]

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.

I really don’t care about the OP as Retired already covered the basic fact and closed any real discussion on this thread. This I could not let slide though. If you believe what you just stated it is because you do not know anything about PSTD and such blanket statements should not be made. PTSD should NOT affect your ability to own a gun if it does not (and this is often the case) affect homicidal or suicidal tendencies. I know MANY people that have been affected by PSTD and it does not always translate into suicidal or homicidal thoughts or tendencies.

 

[Agit8r]

bullshit!

yes, and the next paragraph is to get them ready for the coming communist rationing, right?

Take guns away from everyone who know is willing and able to use them to defend their freedom.

that would be neither politic nor practicable. I don't understand why people are worried about such things. there are at least 80,000,000 armed civilians, compared to fewer than 1.5 million active duty military and about the same number of reserves. Even assuming that all these soldiers cooperated in this gun grab, they would face tall odds.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

this isn't about stopping suicide among veterans, this is about disarming veterans and you know it.

this is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

bullshit!

Well, there's a brilliant and well thought out response. While I wouldn't have epected better of you, conservatives with IQs above room temperature must be cringing at your responses.

 

[S.J.]

this is about ensuring that people with mental issues don't have access to firearms.

bullshit!

Well, there's a brilliant and well thought out response. While I wouldn't have epected better of you, conservatives with IQs above room temperature must be cringing at your responses.

I wouldn't expect a useful idiot like you to say anything different.

 

[AmyNation]

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 :[

The measure that adds mentally unstable soliders to the no buy list was passed in 1994.

 

[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.

I really don’t care about the OP as Retired already covered the basic fact and closed any real discussion on this thread. This I could not let slide though. If you believe what you just stated it is because you do not know anything about PSTD and such blanket statements should not be made. PTSD should NOT affect your ability to own a gun if it does not (and this is often the case) affect homicidal or suicidal tendencies. I know MANY people that have been affected by PSTD and it does not always translate into suicidal or homicidal thoughts or tendencies.

If you have sever enough PTSD that you are found mentally incompetent you shouldn't be allowed to buy a firearm. Period.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

bullshit!

Well, there's a brilliant and well thought out response. While I wouldn't have epected better of you, conservatives with IQs above room temperature must be cringing at your responses.

I wouldn't expect a useful idiot like you to say anything different.

Coming from a useless idiot, I'll consider the source and drive on.

 

[S.J.]

Well, there's a brilliant and well thought out response. While I wouldn't have epected better of you, conservatives with IQs above room temperature must be cringing at your responses.

I wouldn't expect a useful idiot like you to say anything different.

Coming from a useless idiot, I'll consider the source and drive on.

Don't stop until you cross the border.

 

[OKTexas]

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".

The point is the determination of competency is made by VA, not a court, there is no due process.

 

[OKTexas]

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

Rights can only be denied by due process, meaning a court of law, not some VA administrator.

 

[OKTexas]

Every couple of years there is a push to prevent the VA from adding the names of the mentally unsound vets to the no buy list. Luckily ,so far it has failed every time.

How about we give a doctor the ability to determine if a woman would be a fit mother, and if he doesn't think she would be, require her to be sterilized. Do you think that would be a good thing? That's the road you seem to be willing to go down.

 

[AmericanFirst]

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

To you credible source is one that supports the stupid lefts ideas, like huffypuffylyingpost.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

So your saying a presumption of guilt is ok assuming you have the chance to prove innocence, isn't that a tad ass backwards of what the system should be?