Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

  1. #1
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272

    Exclamation Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

    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.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...e-of-firearms/
    It has started.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    The letter is not the problem. The problem is the law behind it not clearly stating what an adjudication of being mentally defective is. The law should clearly state that such an adjudication can only be made by a court with a judge and jury, and only if the "accused" has competent counsel. A mere VA administrative decision should not be considered such an "adjudication." Currently, the government contends that it is, and this letter merely reflects that understanding of the law. That understanding will only be changed when Sommee one has been denied his RKBA by such an administrative decision and takes it to court. Unfortunately, someone has to be wronged by this understanding before all the others who may be and have been wronged can get relief.

    Don't be horrified by the letter. It is only reflecting the current reality of the law. Our job is to get that reality changed by being a test case or supporting someone who is.

    BTW, the article points to the possibility of a physical defect causing an adjudication. Where does the letter say this? If it does, then the VA IS clearly acting outside the scope of the current law which does not remove the RKBA for physical defects, only mental defects. The lefties should be rising up against this one because it is discrimination against the handicapped. If someone is physically incapable of using a firearm in a typical manner, then a reasonable accommodation must be made so that he can fire a gun with eye-movements (or breathing into a tube) if necessary!

  3. #3
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    So it's ok to have issues and have weapons as long as you are still in service of the Fed Gov and using them against Fed Gov enemies.

    But it is not ok to have issues and have them once you are out?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  4. #4
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    <snip> BTW, the article points to the possibility of a physical defect causing an adjudication. Where does the letter say this? If it does, then the VA IS clearly acting outside the scope of the current law which does not remove the RKBA for physical defects, only mental defects. The lefties should be rising up against this one because it is discrimination against the handicapped. If someone is physically incapable of using a firearm in a typical manner, then a reasonable accommodation must be made so that he can fire a gun with eye-movements (or breathing into a tube) if necessary!
    You must click here and then go to the bottom of the article. Then select the provided image(s) to read the letter.

    Page one of the letter, second sentence.
    What Information Did We Receive? ..... This evidence indicates that you are not able to handle your VA benefit payments because of a physical or mental condition.
    This sentence sets up the use of the term "evidence."

    What Will We Do with This Information? We propose to rate you incompetent for VA purposes.
    The term incompetent is now interjected for use in the letter. This ties evidence and competency together.

    What happen If You Are Rated Incompetent? [go to page two of the letter to read the "gun" part].
    The evidence used to determine competency results in gun rights being revoked.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    The letter is not the problem.
    The content of this letter is outrageous. There is no PHYSICAL issue that than remove one from owning a gun. If you are paralyzed you can still own a gun.

    Maybe you have a trick knee, so you can't have a gun .. that's what they are aiming at. You might trip or fall down and discharge your weapon and injure someone. Or a broken finger that does not allow you to shoot properly...

    Or you have a cold and that may put you in a bad mood.

    Only a judge can take away your gun rights ..

    A doctor? Really? How many doctors have people seen who say "you need surgery" and we didn't have it and we are fine today? Medical science is not a science.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    You must click here and then go to the bottom of the article. Then select the provided image(s) to read the letter.

    Page one of the letter, second sentence.This sentence sets up the use of the term "evidence."

    The term incompetent is now interjected for use in the letter. This ties evidence and competency together.

    The evidence used to determine competency results in gun rights being revoked.
    Thanks. Due to time limitations at the moment, and that I trust you, I didn't click the links.

    The VA is overstepping its bounds if it is using a physical disability as a reason to deny anyone the RKBA. There is no legal justification for this, even if you accept the constitutionality of the GCA.

    I will send monetary support to anyone fighting a lawsuit because they have received such a decision from the VA based solely on physical disabilities and not mental defects.

    Again, thanks for your informative and sourced reply. It stands in stark contrast to a nearby post.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  7. #7
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585

    Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

    I haven't got that letter but if I do it will be interesting as my only problem is a bad knee from letting the military try to fix my acl twice that my knee now sounds like a pepper grinder.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    One of my customers today reported reading such a letter that one of his friends received.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Uber_Olafsun View Post
    I haven't got that letter but if I do it will be interesting as my only problem is a bad knee from letting the military try to fix my acl twice that my knee now sounds like a pepper grinder.
    Well, you might fall down ! Ka-Pow 20 kids killed....

    What rubbish

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    The blaze did a really did a good look into the letter, I am just glad I did not answer any of the questions in the detailed mental questionnaire when I came back state side.http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...m-owning-guns/


    TheBlaze reached out to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs for more insight but has not heard back yet. From what we found on its website, the VA’s Fiduciary Program was established to “protect veterans and beneficiaries who are unable to manage their VA benefits through the appointment and oversight of a fiduciary.”

    Under the program — and as stated in the letter — if a person is deemed incompetent — which could be due to injury, disease or mental illness — and unable manage benefit payments, someone can be named as a fiduciary to do so for them. This person, the website states, is generally a family member but court-appointed or professional fiduciaries are possible as well (therefore Connelly’s assertion that a “stranger” be named is technically possible, but not the rule).

    The counterargument, however, might sound something like this: If a person is rated as too incompetent to handle their own benefit payments, might it be a good time to consider other things that might not be advisable for the person to handle?

    The VA states on its Fiduciary Program website, according to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, being determined as unable to manage benefits then prevents you from “purchasing, possessing, receiving or transporting a firearm or ammunition.” This act was signed into law in 1993.

    As TheBlaze reported in December 2012, some congress members and others want this law changed:

    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.

    [...]

    “We consider it an abject tragedy that so many of our veterans return home, after risking life and limb to defend our freedom, only to be stripped of their Second Amendment rights because they need help managing their compensation,” Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, wrote last year in an editorial.

    But Connelly in his piece on Red Flag News takes issue with the fact that the letter doesn’t specify how incompetency is determined.

    “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,” Connelly wrote.

    The VA’s Fiduciary Program website doesn’t delve into this either. It does state that a person has the right to appeal his or her fiduciary if he or she disagrees with the fiduciary selection. This does not seem to imply that the classification of incompetency is appealable though.

    Finding information about how veterans are evaluated for competency is hard to come by. A document detailing a job description for someone who would evaluate veteran claims, last revised in 2009, seems to give some insight (emphasis added):

    The initial examiner develops evidence which would establish that the veteran’s actions are such that he cannot conduct himself in a rational manner. Guides are far from precise and considerable imagination is required to ferret out the kind of evidence upon which to base a sound conclusion. However, the primary knowledge requirement is that of understanding the manifestations of mental diseases. The rating board makes the decisions as to competency. Decisions of the VA in matters of competency may vary from court determinations and have a most important bearing on the right to receive benefits. If a beneficiary is judged to be incompetent, the examiner must seek further evidence to determine who should receive the monetary award due.

    Connelly in his post stated that USJF will be filing a Freedom of Information Act Request to the VA in an effort to obtain the criteria used to determine competency, which might therefore be “plac[ing] veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights.”

    It should also be pointed out that the VA website says being deemed incompetent to manage benefits does not affect non-VA finances or the person’s right to vote.

    Still, Connelly questions “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?” Connelly wrote. “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.”
    Last edited by zack991; 02-22-2013 at 09:29 PM.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    After reading the blaze article, I am even more alarmed.
    Guides are far from precise and considerable imagination is required to ferret out the kind of evidence upon which to base a sound conclusion.


    Imagination?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

    It's wise to disarm the veterans. They are trained well. Government must preserve itself.

    Our veterans deserve better though. They may suffer from acute stress disorder or PTSD but that is inherent to fighting wars that are a decade plus. No other country has had that much skin in the game in the past 10 years.

    Thank you all

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by palerider116 View Post
    It's wise to disarm the veterans. They are trained well. Government must preserve itself.

    Our veterans deserve better though. They may suffer from acute stress disorder or PTSD but that is inherent to fighting wars that are a decade plus. No other country has had that much skin in the game in the past 10 years.

    Thank you all
    Wait a minute!

    What about victims of robbery, or house fire, or car accidents, or being turned down by that hawt chick three cubicles over? Those are all also events known to cause PTSD as well as random violent emotional outbursts. And speaking of which, let's not forget that speeding ticket for going 2 MPH over the limit on a downhill reverse curve. Ir finding out AutoCorrrect has done its thing once again.

    What about little johnny or Jane who did not get a red plastic rocket and a pony for Christmas? How long will that emotional scar continue to effect them, and thus endanger us?

    The saying is "Nothing is too good for our Veterans" and in this case that's what the VA should be doing - nothing! Refer the vet to the courts for a competency hearing. No administrative fiat to take away rightS - more than just RKBA is innvolved.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  14. #14
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    The letter posted on the web site states that they received a report from the Portland OR VA Hospital. The report is then classified as evidence. The letter states that the evidence is explained (contained) within the letter, it is not. There is a air of "legality" in the wording of the letter.

    That document is a administrative determination regarding a administrative process. Anyone who receives this type of letter from the VA must contact a attorney. The determination of the VA is not a legal finding.

    This issue is far more than just losing your 2A right. Consider the affect on every aspect of your life if a federal bureaucracy determines that you are unable to "handle" your affairs re VA benefits. How then could you be reasonably expected to handle any of your affairs.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  15. #15
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The letter posted on the web site states that they received a report from the Portland OR VA Hospital. The report is then classified as evidence. The letter states that the evidence is explained (contained) within the letter, it is not. There is a air of "legality" in the wording of the letter.

    That document is a administrative determination regarding a administrative process. Anyone who receives this type of letter from the VA must contact a attorney. The determination of the VA is not a legal finding.

    This issue is far more than just losing your 2A right. Consider the affect on every aspect of your life if a federal bureaucracy determines that you are unable to "handle" your affairs re VA benefits. How then could you be reasonably expected to handle any of your affairs.
    Portland is my VA region and I'm 50% disabled, physically. So a PHYSICAL disability can somehow be sufficient to try to take my weapons? I don't think so. Due process requires more than some bureaucrat deciding they don't like how I handle my finances. I'm still dealing with the financial aftermath of a divorce. I have two lawsuits in the system and a third potentially coming down soon....collections/forclosure issue.... perhaps that bureaucrat thinks I'm not handling my finances properly and POOF I'm "incompetent" to handle my VA benefits as well as disqualified from firearms?

    Sorry but I smell a rat and I'm not playing that game.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •