Veterans Disarmament Act

[michaeledward]

No, they are not, & I wouldn't want them to be.

I have no problem with the organization having an agenda, and vigourously advocating for that agenda. It seemed to me that the discussion was using the GOA's interpretation of the bill, and conflating it with the bill, itself.

It seems unhelpful to confuse to two.

 

[Doc_Jude]

It seems unhelpful to confuse to two.

Funny, I thought that was politics... ^_^

 

[Cruentus]

Despite the hyperbole of the title of this thread, what I can read and understand of this legislation, is that it provides money to organizaitons so that they can comply with laws on the books. This legislation does not appear to be creating new laws in any way. At least as I understand it.

The problem is, new stipulations on the existing laws, and those stipulations are more then unreasonable.

From what I understand (unless I am misinformed), section [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]102(b)(1)(C)(iv) in HR 2640 provides for raw medical records (from the VA and elsewhere) to be dumped into the NICS system. There is historical precidence for this, as this was done during the Clinton admin., and 83,000 vets were prevented from owning firearms due to things in their medical records, like PTSD.

And, supposedly, under legislation, they redefine "mentally defective" as anyone who is diagnosed to be a possible danger to himself by any "[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]court, commission, committee or other authorized person." [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] This is far different then before, where "mentally defective" was something that had to be determined by the court system, and where people had all the protection of due process. Now, with this legislation, any kook could diagnose you with PTSD, anxiety, depression, or what have you, and despite the accuracy of that determination, if those raw records end up in the system, you could be denied your right to own a gun.

For most private citizens, your medical records can remain private because there is no government agency overseeing them. For vets, much of your medical records are kept by a government office (VA). So all that has to happen is that these raw records are turned over to the NICS system, and bam, thousands of vets are now unable to own a firearm. It appears that this legislation provides for exactly that.

Do you know how many vets rely on their abilities to carry and own firearms for their employment? How many vets are in the security and law enforcement industry, for example? Or how many vets serve in the National Guard and in other agencies, and rely on their abilities to own firearms to stay trained up on their own time so they can continue to effectively serve (going to ranges and so forth)? Yet, they will now be barred from employment and livelihood as well, because they won't be allowed to carry due to raw records.

The real ***** of this is, vets went to war to protect our freedoms. Now they come home to lose theirs!?

Now, knowing that this is what is wrong with this bill, how could ANYONE, anti-gun included, be in support for this bill?

[/FONT]

The NRA supports the legislation.

If my information is accurate as I have read, I don't care if the Pope, the Dali Llama, and Charlton Heston himself team up to support this legislation. What's wrong is wrong, and if the end result is what I described, then it is wrong regardless of who supports it.
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]

C.


[/FONT]

 

[Cruentus]

lol...

OK, I'm totally fired up and pissed off....

BUT I DON"T KNOW WHO I AM PISSED OFF AT YET!! :toilclaw:

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=246&issue=018

The NRA is claiming that vets won't be adversely effected by the law, and that it would actually help because of the expungement process.

But I am skeptical still. But basically, stories are not matching up right now. Proponents, NRA included, are making one claim, while exponents are claiming another. I will need to see more evidence on this one before I know who to be mad at. I do know that if the exponents are correct, that this is a very scary proposition. I just hope that they aren't if this goes through...

 

[Cruentus]

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=221&issue=018

 

[Guardian]

Guardian,

I did not write the language you copied. I read it. And copied from a page about the legislation.

The underlined portion is language from the Gun Owners of America. They are hardly an impartial group, are they?

Strange, that when you copy the information from my post, you do not copy it completely. ... You leave out the part that says the NRA supports the legislation.

What's your agenda?

I know you didn't write it Michael, that was not my intent, my intent was that you read that they sent medical records over to be included that in the system to include those with PTSD which is in the bill for those with mental disorders, that's it's to general and could eliminate alot of folks from owning a gun.

No agenda partner, just making a point or trying to. Don't think because something is different then or not everything is put down, that their is agenda, some would think your paranoid which I don't think is the case here.

All I did was try and point out an opposing view.

 

[Big Don]

Were I conspiratorially minded, I'd say this was a conspiracy to take guns out of the hands of those with the skills (assumes a lot) to use them best.
Since I'm not, PTSD is one of those things that is just over diagnosed. I'm surprised there aren't commercials on TV for anti-PTSD drugs

 

[Doc_Jude]

Were I conspiratorially minded, I'd say this was a conspiracy to take guns out of the hands of those with the skills (assumes a lot) to use them best.
Since I'm not, PTSD is one of those things that is just over diagnosed. I'm surprised there aren't commercials on TV for anti-PTSD drugs

Just one more reason to support the CMA...

 

[tellner]

Don, I really don't think that's an issue. We already know that the Masses will not rise up in revolt against the government. If they were going to it would have happened by now. And we are under such thorough surveillance and monitoring that no organized violent resistance is possible. A bunch of unorganized, unsupported, thoroughly infiltrated guys with sub-par small arms simply can not fight the police state.

Blackwater versus MoM?
Delta Force versus some former ground-pounder and a dozen of his friends (not including the three informers)?
The MJTF versus a bunch of guys who think that their religion will protect them from automatic weapons?
MacArthur versus the Bonus Marchers?
The FBI versus the Aryan Nations?
The Pinkertons versus the CIO?

I know which way a smart man bets.

A few rifles and pistols are completely irrelevant. The military and DoJ know this.

 

[Guardian]

Don, I really don't think that's an issue. We already know that the Masses will not rise up in revolt against the government. If they were going to it would have happened by now. And we are under such thorough surveillance and monitoring that no organized violent resistance is possible. A bunch of unorganized, unsupported, thoroughly infiltrated guys with sub-par small arms simply can not fight the police state.

Blackwater versus MoM?
Delta Force versus some former ground-pounder and a dozen of his friends (not including the three informers)?
The MJTF versus a bunch of guys who think that their religion will protect them from automatic weapons?
MacArthur versus the Bonus Marchers?
The FBI versus the Aryan Nations?
The Pinkertons versus the CIO?

I know which way a smart man bets.

A few rifles and pistols are completely irrelevant. The military and DoJ know this.

Do you think that's true that those who wished would have by now? How did it take the Colonies to rise up, how much crap did they take, quite a bit if I remember right. You don't rise up miltiarily wise against a vastly superior force. You plan and then you implement those plans that will give you the best chance possible and direct to direct confrontation will not be on the menu.

 

[tellner]

Maybe. But there has to be some sort of chance of actually succeeding.

The British had other concerns that split their attention. The colonies received aid from Britain's enemies. They had at least a third of the population actively on their side. They had an independent industrial base. They had weapons which were at least equivalent to the other side's. They had Dupont making their gunpowder.

Most of all, they could organize.

Today that's pretty much impossible. Most people are probably not aware of the degree to which what we say is recorded, collated and analyzed. There is truly massive surveillance, and the government has a well developed program of domestic intelligence. You can be just about guaranteed that any serious efforts at undermining or overthrowing the current will be squashed. During the American Revolution the papers and broadsheets were independent. And it was easy to ignore the media. Today the media are all-pervasive. And they are owned by a small and shrinking elite which is utterly committed to things the way they are.

The Maoist program of starting with the countryside, moving to the villages, then the towns and finally the cities saving your regular troops for the last push won't work in a highly urbanized country. "Leaderless resistance" a la the Neo-Nazis is annoying. So far it hasn't actually accomplished anything.

Nope. The 1776 fantasies are just that. The popguns are worthless as tools of social change. All they'll do is bring overwhelming force down on anyone stupid enough to use them against the government or its owners. The only thing that has a chance of working is a sea-change in attitudes. If the subjects and the enforcers decide not to listen to the rulers the rulers have nothing.

 

[chinto]

unless and until there is a reason from the ACTIONS, then the taking of any constitutional right from any one is beyond reprehensible and as far as I am concerned Illegal!! the Constitution of the United States of America is the final arbitrator and trumps all laws... ( call me a strict constructionist!)