Can the VA prevent Veterans from possessing fire arms.. the very people that fought

[healthmyths]

for our rights under the Constitution in the 2nd Amendment???

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.



SHOCK REPORT ? Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms | The Gateway Pundit

 

[OriginalShroom]

I read part of that earlier and meant to do some research on it. thanks for bringing it up.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

for our rights under the Constitution in the 2nd Amendment???

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.

View attachment 24588

SHOCK REPORT ? Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms | The Gateway Pundit

For the Obama administration to make such a claim of these veterans is to already accuse them and place them in a position of guilt, thereby denying them the right of a trial by jury (which is a violation of the 6th Amendment). Then there is also the violation of both the 4th and 14th Amendments. This will never stand long under Constitutional Law.

 

[Lakhota]

I'll reserve judgement until I see some credible sources.

 

[Redbone]

for our rights under the Constitution in the 2nd Amendment???

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.

View attachment 24588

SHOCK REPORT ? Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms | The Gateway Pundit

For the Obama administration to make such a claim of these veterans is to already accuse them and place them in a position of guilt, thereby denying them the right of a trial by jury (which is a violation of the 6th Amendment). Then there is also the violation of both the 4th and 14th Amendments. This will never stand long under Constitutional Law.

Yet it fits right in with Obama's anti-gun crusade. Easy to understand if one considers that Obama knows those veterans would stand up against some future actions he plans on taking. He would want those veterans unarmed should that happen. I suggest he has some major unconstitutional plans to implement before his term is up. Getting rid of the 2nd Amendment will be the start of it all too.

 

[S.J.]

To those of us with our eyes open, this comes as no surprise. Remember the DHS memo that was put out shortly after the commie took office? War veterans are considered "potential lone wolf terrorists". Them, and "one issue voters" or people who are opposed to abortion. Liberals are so stupid they can't see what is in store for them. They'll possible wake up when they hear the "click" of the leg irons being locked.

 

[Redbone]

To those of us with our eyes open, this comes as no surprise. Remember the DHS memo that was put out shortly after the commie took office? War veterans are considered "potential lone wolf terrorists". Them, and "one issue voters" or people who are opposed to abortion. Liberals are so stupid they can't see what is in store for them. They'll possible wake up when they hear the "click" of the leg irons being locked.

Obama is not in charge of this very anti-american agenda he is leading. Those that pull his strings are sure that we will here the clicks first.

 

[healthmyths]

Two distinct sources from opposite ends of the ideology spectrum!

This from the Daily KOS, "The workers paper"!!!
Last week, one of its 21 co-sponsors in the Senate, Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, tried to attach it as amendment to the defense appropriations bill. It momentarily "threatened to become the biggest sticking point" in getting that $631 billion bill passed.
It appears Coburn will give up that effort, but seek to add the amendment to some other bill.
At issue is whether a veteran who has been found unable to handle his or her financial affairs should have the right to own a gun.
Daily Kos: Senate bill: Veterans shouldn't lose their guns because VA says they can't handle their own finances


Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sought to amend the bill to stop the Veterans Affairs Department from putting the names of veterans deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their finances into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which prohibits them from buying or owning firearms.

Read more: Veterans' gun rights a sticky issue in defense bill | Fox News

 

[konradv]

I'll reserve judgement until I see some credible sources.

It's real. The problem is that the OP leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency, NOT veterans. It's just another in a string of "lies of omission".

 

[NYcarbineer]

LOL,

this is merely an application of existing legislation, and exactly the sort of alternative gun control that the NRA has been pushing lately.

 

[healthmyths]

I'll reserve judgement until I see some credible sources.

It's real. The problem is that the OP leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency, NOT veterans. It's just another in a string of "lies of omission".

You said I " leaves out a salient fact. This is about competency,"

Obviously you aren't "competent" yourself at reading comprehension!!!

"It appears Coburn will give up that effort, but seek to add the amendment to some other bill.
At issue is whether a veteran who has been found unable to handle his or her financial affairs should have the right to own a gun. "

So I read "veteran" Unable (competent) own a gun"

Where is this a LIE?? WHERE DID I LEAVE ANYTHING OUT??

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is another 'Friends of Hamas' category story.

 

[AmyNation]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

 

[AmyNation]

Btw, this isn't an "Obama policy". It's not a new policy either.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

Let's ask Wayne LaPierre his opinion, and let the OP argue with him:

"I'll tell you what would work. We have a mental health system in this country that has completely and totally collapsed. We have no national database of these lunatics.

23 states, my (UNINTEL) however long ago was Virginia Tech? 23 states are still putting only a small number of records into the system. And a lot of states are putting none. So, when they go through the national instant check system, and they go to try to screen out one of those lunatics, the records are not even in the system."

December 23: Wayne LaPierre, Chuck Schumer, Lindsey Graham, Jason Chaffetz, Harold Ford Jr., Andrea Mitchell, Chuck Todd - Meet the Press - Transcripts | NBC News

 

[Mustang]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

You beat me to it.

The very first part of the first sentence which is at the beginning of the highlighted red box states:

A determination of incompetency will prevent you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.
​

Now, considering the sheer number of Veteran suicides that have reached epidemic proportions in recent months and years, is the desire of conservatives to score cheap political points SO OVERWHELMINGLY important to them as to supersede the importance of trying to prevent combat veterans who may be suffering from both PTSD and depression from possibly taking their own lives?

Is that how low the conservatives movement has sunk to in their individual and collective desire to lash out at President Obama?

 

[AmyNation]

Every couple of years there is a push to prevent the VA from adding the names of the mentally unsound vets to the no buy list. Luckily ,so far it has failed every time.

 

[AmyNation]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

You beat me to it.

The very first part of the first sentence which is at the beginning of the highlighted red box states:

A determination of incompetency will prevent you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.
​

Now, considering the sheer number of Veteran suicides that have reached epidemic proportions in recent months and years, is the desire of conservatives to score cheap political points SO OVERWHELMINGLY important to them as to supersede the importance of trying to prevent combat veterans who may be suffering from both PTSD and depression from possibly taking their own lives?

Is that how low the conservatives movement has sunk to in their individual and collective desire to lash out at President Obama?

The story in the OP makes it seem as if random vets are being targeted and that a simple piece of paper is denying them the right to own a gun. Obviously that's not the case and this is about more than just firearms. The vet's doctor alerts the VA, that he or she feels the vet is mentally unsound, then an investigation is done, and a hearing is held. The vet can either agree to the findings or they can fight it. If they fight it and lose they can appeal.

If they lose, a family member is put in charge of the vets finances until such a time that the vet is deemed sound enough to care for themselves and they go on the no buy list until such a time as well.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

These people have been found mentally incompetent. Why do you want the mentally unsound to own guns?

No they haven't been found incompetent. Further in order to apply to the 2nd Amendment it REQUIRES a finding in a Court room not from a bureaucracy.

 

[Missourian]

"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S."

Read more: Napolitano stands by controversial report - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
​

Fits perfectly.
​