Posted on 12/23/2007 12:28:24 PM PST by kellynla
Congress has given gun owners in America a Christmas gift: a blade in the back, according to officials with Gun Owners of America.
The organization said the plan supported by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and others, and known as the Veterans Disarmament Act by opponents, is being forwarded now to President Bush.
While other gun groups have endorsed H.R. 2640, a comprehensive plan to expand the powers of the Brady Bill gun restriction plan, Gun Owners of America has opposed it vigorously, and described its provisions for banning individuals, especially veterans, from owning guns as unreasonable.
"The core of the bill's problems is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a 'prohibited person' on the basis of a 'medical finding of disability,' so long as a veteran had an 'opportunity' for some sort of 'hearing' before some 'lawful authority' (other than a court)," the organization said in a new criticism of the plan. "Presumably, this 'lawful authority' could even be the psychiatrist himself," the organization said.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Yes, kellynla. That’s they only way they will get mine too. Merry Christmas kellynla to you and all of yours.
Thanks, a very Merry Christmas to you & yours!
Semper Fi
Kelly
They know it, too. The Left will always hide behind some "law" and never try to do the dirty work they want done themselves.
The Left had better fear the American Patriot. We will never go easily nor quietly into obscurity.
That is EXACTLY what will happen unless it is ... "They'll take my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers" and all my neighbors cold dead hands too ...
Which in my neighborhood ... it would be
According to the Left, veterans are probably automatically considered mentally disabled by virtue of having once served their country.
WorldNUTdaily takes great pride in misrepresenting, over-hyping, and quoting things out of context.
The real truth is that there are already *existing* prohibitions on veterans owning guns if they’ve ever had the briefest mention of combat stress or post traumatic stress on their record...and the bill in question allows our veterans to expunge any such mention of “illness” if they’ve had no civilian violent incidents over the past few years.
Which is to say, this bill will **repeal** the existing federal de facto bans on veteran gun ownership.
WorldNUTdaily simply spins it as something that it’s not in order to drum up hits to their pathetic web site.
Schumer wasn’t even the force behind this bill...it was written by staunch pro-gun-ally Coburn. So WorldNUTdaily even got that part wrong.
It should be renamed the “Veteran’s Administration Avoidance Act”. A veteran would have to be insane to seek any aid from the government for fear that an anti-gun bureaucrat could strip him of his right to keep and bear arms.
Wonder if we’ll all be ordered to get evaluated this coming year..?
All Southroners are crazy,,say around 90% own guns,,
Hell's bells and little catfish! This is an NRA crafted bill.
Welcome to FR. You’re having a good first day here, and I hope you have many more.
What tends to run higher (% wise) in Veterans than in the normal population. IMHO, its patriotism and this is another step of the left vilifying that which makes America great. Bush will sign this.
IMO, its time to start interviewing any doctor we see to see their stance. Do not subject yourself to any doctor who supports gun control.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Gun Owners of America and its supporters took a knife in the back yesterday, as Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) out-smarted his congressional opposition into agreeing on a so-called “compromise” on HR 2640 — a bill which now goes to the President’s desk.
The bill — known as the Veterans Disarmament Act to its opponents — is being praised by the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign.
The Brady Bunch crowed “Victory! U.S. Congress Strengthens Brady Background Check System.” The NRA stated that last minute changes to the McCarthy bill made a “good bill even better [and that] the end product is a win for American gun owners.”
But Gun Owners of America has issued public statements decrying this legislation.
The core of the bill’s problems is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a “prohibited person” on the basis of a “medical finding of disability,” so long as a veteran had an “opportunity” for some sort of “hearing” before some “lawful authority” (other than a court). Presumably, this “lawful authority” could even be the psychiatrist himself.
Note that unlike with an accused murderer, the hearing doesn’t have to occur. The “lawful authority” doesn’t have to be unbiased. The veteran is not necessarily entitled to an attorney — much less an attorney financed by the government.
So what do the proponents have to say about this?
ARGUMENT: The Veterans Disarmament Act creates new avenues for prohibited persons to seek restoration of their gun rights.
ANSWER: What the bill does is to lock in — statutorily — huge numbers of additional law-abiding Americans who will now be denied the right to own a firearm.
And then it “graciously” allows these newly disarmed Americans to spend tens of thousands of dollars for a long-shot chance to regain the gun rights this very bill takes away from them.
More to the point, what minimal gains were granted by the “right hand” are taken away by the “left.” Section 105 provides a process for some Americans diagnosed with so-called mental disabilities to get their rights restored in the state where they live. But then, in subsection (a)(2), the bill stipulates that such relief may occur only if “the person will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the GRANTING OF THE RELIEF WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.” (Emphasis added.)
Um, doesn’t this language sound similar to those state codes (like California’s) that have “may issue” concealed carry laws — where citizens “technically” have the right to carry, but state law only says that sheriffs MAY ISSUE them a permit to carry? When given such leeway, those sheriffs usually don’t grant the permits!
Prediction: liberal states — the same states that took these people’s rights away — will treat almost every person who has been illegitimately denied as a danger to society and claim that granting relief would be “contrary to the public interest.”
Let’s make one thing clear: the efforts begun during the Clinton Presidency to disarm battle-scarred veterans — promoted by the Brady Anti-Gun Campaign — is illegal and morally reprehensible.
But section 101(c)(1)(C) of HR 2640 would rubber-stamp those illegal actions. Over 140,000 law-abiding veterans would be statutorily barred from possessing firearms.
True, they can hire a lawyer and beg the agency that took their rights away to voluntarily give them back. But the agency doesn’t have to do anything but sit on its hands. And, after 365 days of inaction, guess what happens? The newly disarmed veteran can spend thousands of additional dollars to sue. And, as the plaintiff, the wrongly disarmed veteran has the burden of proof.
Language proposed by GOA would have automatically restored a veteran’s gun rights if the agency sat on its hands for a year. Unfortunately, the GOA amendment was not included.
The Veterans Disarmament Act passed the Senate and the House yesterday — both times WITHOUT A RECORDED VOTE. That is, the bill passed by Unanimous Consent, and was then transmitted to the White House.
Long-time GOA activists will remember that a similar “compromise” deal helped the original Brady Law get passed. In 1993, there were only two or three senators on the floor of that chamber who used a Unanimous Consent agreement (with no recorded vote) to send the Brady bill to President Clinton — at a time when most legislators had already left town for their Thanksgiving Break.
Gun owners can go to http://www.gunowners.org/news/nws9402.htm to read about how this betrayal occurred 14 years ago.
With your help, Gun Owners of America has done a yeoman’s job of fighting gun control over the years, considering the limited resources that we have. Together, we were able to buck the Brady Campaign/NRA coalition in 1999 (after the Columbine massacre) and were able to defeat the gun control that was proposed in the wake of that shooting.
Yesterday, we were not so lucky. But we are not going to go away. GOA wants to repeal the gun-free zones that disarm law-abiding Americans and repeal the other gun restrictions that are on the books. That is the answer to Virginia Tech. Unfortunately, the House and Senate chose the path of imposing more gun control.
So our appeal to you is this — please help us to grow this coming year. Please help us to get more members and activists. If you add $10 to your membership renewal this year, we can reach new gun owners in the mail and tell them about GOA.
Please urge your friends to join GOA... and, at the very least, make sure they sign up for our free e-mail alerts so that we can mobilize more gun owners than ever before!
http://www.gunowners.org/a122007.htm
Merry Christmas and welcome to FR
This is the kind of stuff that I’m afraid of, if I try to collect disability. 0.o
Thank you for your service. God Bless you and Merry Christmas. If you don’t mind me asking, are you still in the military or did you just get out with a medical waiver?
I believe that President Bush has already indicated that he is going to sign it.
At any rate, I believe it is not going to be very long before it is gut check time.
That’s really the bottom line, and it can only escalate to something they won’t be able to control if it begins.
Michael Frazier
Disturbingly broad and vague language.
However, the proposed update would allow that "adjudication" to be determined not only by a court but by any competent authority, which could include a Veterans Administration psychologist, any panel of psychologists or a wide range of other possible "competent authorities."
That will meld conveniently in with a "Universal Health Care Plan."
It also would automatically include people on a federal no-gun-ownership limit who have been diagnosed with some behavior-related childhood conditions, ...
That fits pretty well with recent plans/attempts to screen all children for psychological disorders. Eliminate them before they're even adults. With an 800% increase in Rxs of psychotropic drugs for children between 1990 and 2000 (I doubt the increase has slowed since then) they can disarm a large segment of the population before they're old enough to vote. Get 'em used to the idea of being gov victim-dependents.
If Hillary is our Queen, the D's control both Houses of the Congress, and the SCOTUS screws up District of Columbia v. Heller then it will be time to go to Red Alert.
The GOA hasn’t accomplished a single, solitary thing in all the years I have been asking on FR. They are completely useless. If you have problems with the NRA, give your money to the Second Amendment Foundation. Despite small numbers, they still worked with the NRA in support of the Katrina Victims.
GOA-AWOL
I knew from the headline that this was going to be a re-write from a GOA press release. This is their hobby-horse. I have never seen the phrase “veterans’ disarmament act” used by anyone other than them.
The bill clarifies the sort of mental health information that should show up on a background check. It would prevent someone like the Virginia Tech shooter, duly judged to be a danger to himself and others, from buying a firearm.
There is not a single clause, a single line, a single word that treats veterans differently from everyone else. The “veterans’ disarmament act” label is a cynical and disingenuous ploy by the GOA to push emotional buttons.
I have a friend who is 20% disabled from RVN after being shot three times there.
He is perfectly sane, well employed as a teacher and a gun owner.
Does this idiocy mean he can no longer own/purchase firearms?
The same NRA that endorsed John Murtha instead of pro-gun Diana Irey in '06. I'm not planning on renewing when my membership expires in '09.
Welcome to Free Republic and Thank You for your Service. Merry Christmas to you and yours.
However, the article cites provisions of the bill. Do you have some rebuttal to the citations they cite? Just accusing The World Nut Daily" of being "The World Nut Daily" is insufficient.
Do you have any specific criticisms of their citations to offerer, other than your bias against what they publish? I don't see any, other than the fact you don't like the publication.
I'm not sure your bias against them constitutes a valid argument.
No. Despite the GOA hysteria and WND's gullibility, the bill does not in any way target veterans.
Bush must veto this.
I believe my father was granted concealed carry just on his veterans status alone (well, thats what he tells me at least). Maybe it’s because he’s old school......?
http://www.gunowners.org/a100307.htm
GOA itself supported Senator Coburn on this bill. Coburn vetted the compromises and signed off on the final bill.
Frankly, Senator Coburn is as pro-gun as you can get.
In contrast, WorldNUTdaily is quoting selective passages and GOA’s complaints in such a way as to stir the pot on the one hand, and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory on the other.
The reality is that this bill speeds up existing background checks (we don’t have to like background checks, but faster background checks are less painful than slow ones) as well as gives veterans the ability to expunge age-old combat trauma medical records that have been used under prior and existing laws to deny our vets the right to buy firearms for “sanity” reasons.
This bill is a REPEAL of the current federal bans on veterans with “mental disorders” from purchasing guns because there is no existing method to clean up their military medical records.
Coburn fixed this problem and thereby repealed that defacto federal gun ban with this law.
Welcome to FR! I just realized that today is my 6 year FRanniversary as well.
Thank your for your patriotic service. May God bless you and your family from this day forward!
HR 2640, The NRA's Latest "Victory."
“We commend the United States Congress for its action today to strengthen the Brady background check system.”
Those were the words of Paul Helmke the President of the Brady gun ban group. The action to which he was referring, as you no doubt know, was the passage of HR 2640, in lighting moves with no debate and no recorded votes.
Both the US Senate and the US House passed this bill on December 19th under "unanimous consent" agreements. That means it was not even discussed. In order for this to happen, the leadership of both parties had to agree to allow it.
We are not surprised politicians would push more gun control with no accountability. But what is greatly troubling is that the National Rifle Association was the primary force behind this latest attack on gun rights.
The NRA's spin machine is operating at full capacity praising the passage of a bill written by the most anti-gun members of Congress.
I know a few cops who should not be allowed access to guns.
Modern Keystone version.
I do not know anything about the bill.
What I do know is that if the brady bunch likes it, it is bad news for gun owners.
That is all it took for me to be against it.
Something ugly this way comes.
JPFO ALERT: SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY
The National Rifle Association has done it. Again.
Having advertised itself for more than a century as the nation's foremost defender of the Second Amendment, the NRA has once again given aid and comfort to politicians -- all of the "usual suspects": Carolyn McCarthy, Charles Schumer, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and that perennial Judas goat John Dingell -- as well as to pressure groups like the Brady Campaign, who are determined to destroy that right, by assisting passage of a law with the potential to strip hundreds of thousands of military veterans of their basic right to own and carry weapons.
This latest slap in the gun owner's face by the overstuffed suits at the NRA -- the same gang who eagerly signed off on the Gun Control Act of 1968, despite its origins in Hitler's Germany -- establishes the "principle" that individuals with the slightest of mental health "problem" (anyone, for instance, who ever sought professional help for mild depression or difficulty sleeping) have no inalienable right to self-defense.
(For more information on the Nazi roots of the 1968 Gun Control Act, be sure to see _Gun Control: Gateway to Tyranny_, available at: JPFO.org )
For politicians, it's a payoff: precisely the response they wished for, to the latest series of what more and more observers now believe (however reluctantly) are purposely contrived incidents in which armed criminals feel free to attack crowds of people they know are unarmed and helpless because the law -- and some corporate policies -- demand it.
For the psychiatric profession, it enshrines their practitioners as powerful arbiters of who may or may not exercise their individual rights.
For America's gun owners, it's just another aspect of the long, continuous, cruel hoax perpetrated by the NRA, which collects millions of dollars in membership money under the false pretense of defending rights that they have proven willing to bargain away on the slightest excuse.
In doing so, they have empowered the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to commit larger and more frequent atrocities of the kind we've become so familiar with over the years. Given past behavior, it would not be above them to pay informants, including those psychiatrists, who will attest to anybody's mental instability, trusting to the increasingly crooked court system to back the Bureau up.
Don't let the NRA suits put a fancy spin on it, it's really very straightforward: first, there was no extra gun law; then there was one -- thanks to the NRA. The last thing this country needs is another gun law. It already has 25,000. It needs to start repealing them. All of them.
There's no way to avoid a simple but apalling truth: the NRA's crawling into bed with the Brady Campaign is _exactly_ like the Anti-Defamation League endorsing the American Nazi Party, unthinkable, unspeakable, and disgusting. And, given the vital role that privately owned arms have played historically and currently in reducing violent crime and deterring foreign aggression, it is probably treason, as well.
Weak, submissive behavior of this kind is not the way for Second Amendment defenders to enter an era of liberal Democratic political dominance.
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership calls upon NRA President John C. Sigler, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action Chris W. Cox (and any of the 75-member board of directors who approves their reprehensible actions) to resign their positions, forfeiting all pensions or "golden parachutes". Not for the first time, by helping to pass yet another infringement of our rights, these people have brought shame upon themselves, their organization, on gun owners everywhere, and especially their country and the Constitution that is its highest law.
- The Liberty Crew
PING!
Any bets on whether our Mexican President will sign it?
NRA = Not Really Americans
I wonder if illegal aliens will be exempt.
To bad the same rstrictions don’t aly to the press.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.