• Announcements

    • Benny

      Forums Restructured   09/22/2016

      A lot of less active forums have been removed and consolidated with larger forums.  SEC Recruiting and Official Game Threads have been merged into SEC Football Talk.  All SEC Social Groups have been moved under their respective team forums. All other Social Groups have been merged into the Water Fountain. Other less active off-topic forums such as Think Tank, SciFi, Gaming, etc, have been merged into the Water Fountain.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Joker

Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

57 posts in this topic

Disturbing Report: Veterans are receiving letters from VA prohibiting the ownership or purchase of firearms

Written By Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D.

How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”?

That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.

The letter provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA. In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent. This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”.

Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs can’t be bothered by such impediments as the Constitution, particularly since they are clearly pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability.

Think about it, the men and women who have laid their lives on the line to defend us and our Constitution are now having their own Constitutional rights denied. There are no clear criteria for the VA to declare a veteran incompetent. It can be the loss of a limb in combat, a head injury, a diagnosis of PTSD, or even a soldier just telling someone at the VA that he or she is depressed over the loss of a buddy in combat. In none of these situations has the person been found to be a danger to themselves or others. If that was the case than all of the Americans who have suffered from PTSD following the loss of a loved one or from being in a car accident would also have to be disqualified from owning firearms. It would also mean that everyone who has ever been depressed for any reason should be disarmed. In fact, many of the veterans being deprived of their rights have no idea why it is happening.

The answer seems to be it is simply because they are veterans. At the USJF we intend to find the truth by filing a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Veterans Affairs to force them to disclose the criteria they are using to place veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights. Then we will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect our American warriors.

The reality is that Obama will not get all of the gun control measures he wants through Congress, and they wouldn’t be enough for him anyway. He wants a totally disarmed America so there will be no resistance to his plans to rob us of our nation. That means we have to ask who will be next. If you are receiving a Social Security check will you get one of these letters? Will the government declare that you are incompetent because of your age and therefore banned from firearm ownership. It certainly fits in with the philosophy and plans of the Obama administration. It is also certain that our military veterans don’t deserve this and neither do any other Americans.

-- Michael Connelly, J.D.

Executive Director, United States Justice Foundation

http://redflagnews.com/headlines/disarming-americas-heros-veterans-receiving-official-letters-prohibiting-them-from-purchasing-possessing-receiving-or-transporting-a-firearm-or-ammunition

Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

Posted by Jim Hoft

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.

This comes on page 2 of the VA letter.

532x167xva-guns.jpg.pagespeed.ic.H-Ue_UzuG5.jpg

Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D. reported this at Red Flag News.

How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated:
“A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”
?

That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/shock-report-veterans-receive-letters-from-va-prohibiting-ownership-or-purchase-of-firearms/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Obama-led government gets worse by the day. I hope we make it through his second term.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how you only have 2 paragraphs posted. Sounds to me like the letter is saying "if" you are found incompetent, not that you automatically are incompetent.

And btw, keeping guns out of the hands of people with PTSD until a doctor clears them is a good thing.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how you only have 2 paragraphs posted. Sounds to me like the letter is saying "if" you are found incompetent, not that you automatically are incompetent.

And btw, keeping guns out of the hands of people with PTSD until a doctor clears them is a good thing.

PTSD is subjective. There aren't any clear symptoms and some may not manifest for months or years? What would stop them from saying every combat veteran must have PTSD?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTSD is subjective. There aren't any clear symptoms and some may not manifest for months or years? What would stop them from saying every combat veteran must have PTSD?

Doctors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doctors.

You mean government doctors that will do whats in the best interest of their employers?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean government doctors that will do whats in the best interest of their employers?

Aaaaand now we see why all this outcry for mental health outreach instead of tighter gun laws is horses--t

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean government doctors that will do whats in the best interest of their employers?

Last I checked, there was nothing that said you had to go to a government doctor. And even if you did, doctors aren't just going to lie. If for no other reason than being sued. But I'm glad to see you're fine with giving weapons to people with mental and emotional problems. I thought that's what conservatives wanted to prevent.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I checked, there was nothing that said you had to go to a government doctor. And even if you did, doctors aren't just going to lie. If for no other reason than being sued. But I'm glad to see you're fine with giving weapons to people with mental and emotional problems. I thought that's what conservatives wanted to prevent.

What stops a doctor from being payed off? PTSD isn't a physical condition, it's mostly a mental condition. The diagnosis of PTSD is subjective, one doctor could say yes, the other could say no. One doctor could be a pretentious socialist liberal(Not that this happens much, most liberals just major in crap like liberal arts) that diagnoses everyone with PTSD to deny them the right to purchase firearms. Most people with PTSD are perfectly normal on the outside, it's not like a rash. I used to have a friend that served in Afghanistan, he came back and was just like he was before he left; shot guns played violent video games and then one day my other friend(his roommate) racked his gun and the guy flipped out and ran outside screaming. How do you diagnose that? It's virtually impossible, so what they're going to do(or say) is that PTSD is a natural human reaction in a combat environment and therefore, everybody that served must have some level of PTSD.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What stops a doctor from being payed off? PTSD isn't a physical condition, it's mostly a mental condition. The diagnosis of PTSD is subjective, one doctor could say yes, the other could say no. One doctor could be a pretentious socialist liberal(Not that this happens much, most liberals just major in crap like liberal arts) that diagnoses everyone with PTSD to deny them the right to purchase firearms. Most people with PTSD are perfectly normal on the outside, it's not like a rash. I used to have a friend that served in Afghanistan, he came back and was just like he was before he left; shot guns played violent video games and then one day my other friend(his roommate) racked his gun and the guy flipped out and ran outside screaming. How do you diagnose that? It's virtually impossible, so what they're going to do(or say) is that PTSD is a natural human reaction in a combat environment and therefore, everybody that served must have some level of PTSD.

Paid off? You do understand that doctors take oaths right? You also understand that no one, especially doctors, works for the government to get rich. Doctors also know what it is to be sued. And I doubt military doctors are going to start throwing their comrades under the bus for no reason.

Just admit it, you don't care if people with mental and emotional problems have guns.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paid off? You do understand that doctors take oaths right?

People take oaths all of the time. In court, you can be charged for perjury for lying under oath. People still lie.

You also understand that no one, especially doctors, works for the government to get rich.

Until they can get their kickbacks for a false PTSD diagnoses.

Doctors also know what it is to be sued. And I doubt military doctors are going to start throwing their comrades under the bus for no reason.

Good luck proving you don't have PTSD. Again, this isn't like a rash. It is an opinionated illness. There isn't a set guideline for diagnosing PTSD.

I didn't think idiots would be stupid enough to reelect Barack Hussein Obama, but s--t happens.

Just admit it, you don't care if people with mental and emotional problems have guns.

Here's the patented liberal slant. Someone that doesn't want to create a system that can easily be abused obviously wants to arm crazy people.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how you only have 2 paragraphs posted. Sounds to me like the letter is saying "if" you are found incompetent, not that you automatically are incompetent.

There are two stories. I posted both of them with links provided.

And btw, keeping guns out of the hands of people with PTSD until a doctor clears them is a good thing

I'm not arguing that. What I am arguing is that the IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT are denying these vets a basic civil right of owning a weapon without due process. The fact is, these doctors work for the VA and we all know how competent they are and have been in the past.....

That's my gripe.

If the vet is believed to be incompetent, then great. Go to court and prove it to a judge. If it's easy like the government claims, then it should be a slam dunk.

I can also understand the subjectivity argument to PTSD as well. Not much is known about PTSD aka Shellshock. We really don't know how to treat, etc, etc.

Doctor's opinions vary from person to person. One doc may say yes, the other may say no.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strict gun laws and lax immigration policy are going to pass because Cons have no alternatives

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strict gun laws and lax immigration policy are going to pass because Cons have no alternatives

No they aren't. Because even most democrats aren't ready to jump aboard Obama's SS Dictator yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they aren't. Because even most democrats aren't ready to jump aboard Obama's SS Dictator yet.

You hide and watch. You didn't foresee re-election, either

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You hide and watch. You didn't foresee re-election, either

How many of these loyal Democrats voted for Obama's budget? Can you guess?

ZERO!

This governmental "power grab" was dead before the debate started.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People take oaths all of the time. In court, you can be charged for perjury for lying under oath. People still lie.

Until they can get their kickbacks for a false PTSD diagnoses.

Good luck proving you don't have PTSD. Again, this isn't like a rash. It is an opinionated illness. There isn't a set guideline for diagnosing PTSD.

I didn't think idiots would be stupid enough to reelect Barack Hussein Obama, but s--t happens.

Here's the patented liberal slant. Someone that doesn't want to create a system that can easily be abused obviously wants to arm crazy people.

So because people have lied in the past, we now can never trust doctors? Cool story, bro.

The burden of proof isn't in proving you don't have PTSD, you've got that backwards.

And its go nothing to do with being liberal, you people just don't want to do anything about the gun problem. You don't care. Even when you say guns aren't the problem, crazy people are the problem, you still won't do anything about the crazy people.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many of these loyal Democrats voted for Obama's budget? Can you guess?

ZERO!

This governmental "power grab" was dead before the debate started.

Obama has never submitted a budget for them to vote on. Yet again you're reporting the GOP talking point of "Obama's budget" which was written by a Republican as a way to say no one likes his plan.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I checked, there was nothing that said you had to go to a government doctor. And even if you did, doctors aren't just going to lie. If for no other reason than being sued. But I'm glad to see you're fine with giving weapons to people with mental and emotional problems. I thought that's what conservatives wanted to prevent.

So only veterans can have mental or emotional problems and not be allowed guns? Why are veterans the only group you mention?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So only veterans can have mental or emotional problems and not be allowed guns? Why are veterans the only group you mention?

Nice try. that's the only group we've mentioned in here. You can go dig up my past posts and see where I said people on serious anti-psychotics or anti-depressants should also be evaluated as a potential risk when it comes to gun buying.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And its go nothing to do with being liberal, you people just don't want to do anything about the gun problem. You don't care. Even when you say guns aren't the problem, crazy people are the problem, you still won't do anything about the crazy people.

To use the words "gun problem" shows your ignorance. We don't have a "baseball bat problem" when a guy beats someone to death with one in the commission of a crime. When some guy downtown stabs another to death with 15 or more stab wounds, we don't have a "knife problem".

And when veterans are potential being denied ownership of a firearm, we don't have a returning "veteran problem".

You liberals refuse to put mental illness, the primary cause of mass shootings and other mass killings, as the PRIMARY and LARGEST cause by far of murder on a large scale. Over 99% of guns, even so called assault weapons that are LEGALLY owned, will never be used in a commission of a crime.

Yet you clowns want to go EXCLUSIVELY AFTER THE GUNS FIRST. You are all so damned naive and many of your friends and family will die as a result if you are successful.............

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To use the words "gun problem" shows your ignorance. We don't have a "baseball bat problem" when a guy beats someone to death with one in the commission of a crime. When some guy downtown stabs another to death with 15 or more stab wounds, we don't have a "knife problem".

And when veterans are potential being denied ownership of a firearm, we don't have a returning "veteran problem".

You liberals refuse to put mental illness, the primary cause of mass shootings and other mass killings, as the PRIMARY and LARGEST cause by far of murder on a large scale. Over 99% of guns, even so called assault weapons that are LEGALLY owned, will never be used in a commission of a crime.

Yet you clowns want to go EXCLUSIVELY AFTER THE GUNS FIRST. You are all so damned naive and many of your friends and family will die as a result if you are successful.............

We had a gun problem. The country is teeming with them and that allows people that have no business possessing them easy access. And I like how your paranoid self threw family and friends in there, cause you're far more likely to harm them or yourself than you are to use your gun in protecting yourself.

Also, NO ONE IS GOING AFTER THE GUNS. That is the red herring gun nuts keep sighting. It's all about ACCESS TO GUNS and that's what needs to be restricted. No purchases without background checks, which should cover criminal and mental health. Period, end of story

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice try. that's the only group we've mentioned in here. You can go dig up my past posts and see where I said people on serious anti-psychotics or anti-depressants should also be evaluated as a potential risk when it comes to gun buying.

Really? They have to be on drugs before you consider getting them off the streets to protect the public at large. There are bats--t crazy people roaming the streets everywhere that are not on drugs............what about that old bastard that shot that bus driver and kidnapped that kid in Alabama a couple of weeks ago as a single example..............was he on medication?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? They have to be on drugs before you consider getting them off the streets to protect the public at large. There are bats--t crazy people roaming the streets everywhere that are not on drugs............what about that old bastard that shot that bus driver and kidnapped that kid in Alabama a couple of weeks ago as a single example..............was he on medication?

What about the guy with a clear cut case of PTSD that killed the American Sniper dude?

Your argument is invalid because you're not making one. You're just trying to stop anything helpful from being done. So what if we can't stop all the crazy folks from getting guns, we can at least stop some.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've already seen that you don't trust some commie doctor who might diagnose you as a loonie and take away your precious penis substitutes.

You're all full of crap, Righties

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Posts

    • jacobp
      Mizzou by 6
    • TheRealBrave
      And you keep mistaking me for some ardent Trump fan. Don't know how many times I have to tell you, I voted for Kasich and loved when Mitt Romney tore Trump apart   I am about as far from a protectionist as you will find
    • TheRealBrave
      LSU has this easily, Locke hasn't faced a defense anywhere near LSU's level yet. LSU 24 Mizzou 10
    • L.A.Hog
      Exactly, he tells you what you want to hear.With no plan to follow.... But he'll reveal it soon...afrer all, its only two months til election..he'll let us know pretty soon, I reckon, what his plan is.... but that wall is the plan, millions of dollars that will be pissed off before construction, then billions to build it and we pay for it.When I say we,i don't include trump because he don't pay taxes.He's a rich welfare baby.... screw that deadbeat bitch...
    • smokeyone
      Maybe it's been so long since we have seen a candidate with a clue we don't recognize them anymore.  Boarders, Standards (law), and Culture. The fundamental essence of a nation. As it stands the system has all but removed them from this dying once great nation. Nobody respects them anymore. No one want to acknowledge they matter. Hell Trump wasn't my first or second choice but he has the message we need to hear
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      bbqit
      bbqit
      63
    2. 2
      razorhead
      razorhead
      55
    3. 3
      foxflyer5
      foxflyer5
      54
    4. 4
      JoeGator
      JoeGator
      50
    5. 5
      RammaJamma
      RammaJamma
      45