Found On Drudge.

[SMS]

I was wondering when this was going to start...

The question now will be what is the definition of someone who isn't mentally fit to own a firearm according to the laws already on the books. I can only assume they will be trying to uncover every nook and cranny to ensure as many people fall into that category as possible.

Surprisingly, this started a long time ago and this policy already affects over 100,000 vets (since 1999, so this isn't an Obama thing).

It's all tied to the VA's Fiduciary assignment process. If the VA makes the determination that a disabled veteran is not capable of managing the financial benefits coming from the VA, the VA requires them to have a fiduciary. That determination then gets forwarded for inclusion into the NICS due to the individual being "mentally defective".

The original intent, to protect the financial interests of the VA and the veteran, is not so bad, but the inclusion in NICS doesn't make much sense....without some legal adjudication. I'm sure a large portion of that 100K actually are batshit crazy or seriously lacking in mental capacity due to injury/mental illness, but they should at least have the ruling validated by a court of law.

There have been several attempts over the years to get that part removed, or at least require a court determination, but all have failed.

 

[Swapwap]

Yup, it's not new, but Obama appoint judges make it mean something more now


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[JCW355]

I was wondering when this was going to start...

The question now will be what is the definition of someone who isn't mentally fit to own a firearm according to the laws already on the books. I can only assume they will be trying to uncover every nook and cranny to ensure as many people fall into that category as possible.

Agreed. Also who will be the one interpeting that definition and passing down the judgement? Some anti-2nd amendment person?

 

[SMS]

Agreed. Also who will be the one interpeting that definition and passing down the judgement? Some anti-2nd amendment person?

Actually probably not. It's a medical determination based on capability to handle one's own finances. The Brady Act implications are a crappy side effect.

Some of the 100K veterans already affected by this actually do have corresponding legal adjudications of impairment to go along with the medical determination. We need to make it that every case requires the same due process and legal component before forwarding to NICS.

 

[Cinaet]

The question now will be what is the definition of someone who isn't mentally fit to own a firearm according to the laws already on the books.

Thinking a year from now PTSD comes to mind. It's the kind of convenient catch-all bureaucracies love.

 

[reddog1]

**sigh**

 

[Pokinfun]

I was in Iraq in 2003, I know I have PTSD. Not dangerous to anyone, not even myself. I am detached from my family, crowds makes me uncomfortable, some bad dreams, odd as it seems I get scared of the dark if I am alone, and I am overly emotional at times some times I start crying from TV commercials or anything designed to make people feel emotinoal.
I also love to deer hunt, I am truly happy sitting in a tree stand, planning the hunt, or talking about deer hunting.
I will not seek help or file of a disability from VA because I worry about losing my rights to own guns, which means I could not go deer hunting. All of these laws about mental health is going to cause people who need help to not seek help. When I retired, my wife asked me if I was going to claim the PTSD, I told her no, eventually the FED will use it as a reason to keep people from owning firearms, that was 6 years ago. Anyone watching politics could see this coming long before Bush ever left office.
Mental health problems get worse over time, if not treated. The effect is going to be worse than the reason.
PS: don't worry about me, I have good support system. I'm am happy, rewarding life, and have developed some good coping skills.