[BykrBayb]

However, I believe that there are, in fact, veterans who are incapable of managing their own affairs due to their service-connected disabilities, and that it probably is a good idea for any veteran determined to be so mentally incapable that they cannot buy their own food to be reviewed for suitability to possess firearms.

A veteran's inability to handle finances does not mean he/she is a danger to himself or others. The life of a disabled vet is difficult enough without suspending their God given rights. If you don't have a reason to bar them from possessing firearms, then you have no business forcing them to defend themselves against baseless accusations.

[101stAirborneVet]

"A veteran's inability to handle finances does not mean he/she is a danger to himself or others. The life of a disabled vet is difficult enough without suspending their God given rights. If you don't have a reason to bar them from possessing firearms, then you have no business forcing them to defend themselves against baseless accusations. "

This is why any such assertion should be made in a court, where 1. frivolous assertions would be less likely as judges don't have time for them, 2. the veteran is entitled to counsel, and 3. the determination is made under the law and not under VA policy. (By the way, this is the system in place for every other American).

I never said I want to bar veterans from owning firearms based on baseless accusations, I said I support any such accusation going through a court so that it must be proven NOT to be baseless.