Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: New Executive Orders aimed at Veterans

  1. #1
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118

    New Executive Orders aimed at Veterans

    The Obama administration issued two new executive orders aimed at disarming this nation's veterans today, citing mental health issues.

    http://likeomggunsareforlosers.blogs...t-will-of.html

  2. #2
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543

    Breaking: Obama Issues Executive Orders on Background Checks

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...campaign=nl_pm

    FUQs:

    President Obama has released two new executive actions on background checks for gun purchases. The actions were posted on WhiteHouse.gov Friday afternoon and according to the Department of Justice and Health and Human Services, will make it easier for states to submit mental health information to the federal background check system known as the National Instant Criminal Background Check System or NICS.

    Today, the Administration is announcing two new executive actions that will help strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of the wrong hands. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a regulation to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons related to mental health, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a proposed regulation to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information on those persons to the federal background check system," the executive action announcement states. "The Administration’s two new executive actions will help ensure that better and more reliable information makes its way into the background check system. The Administration also continues to call on Congress to pass common-sense gun safety legislation and to expand funding to increase access to mental health services.

    While the President and the Vice President continue to do everything they can to reduce gun violence, Congress must also act. Passing common-sense gun safety legislation – including expanding background checks and making gun trafficking a federal crime – remains the most important step we can take to reduce gun violence.

    I wonder if Holder knows that he can't engage in gun trafficking any longer....
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  3. #3
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by wimwag View Post
    The Obama administration issued two new executive orders aimed at disarming this nation's veterans today, citing mental health issues.

    http://likeomggunsareforlosers.blogs...t-will-of.html
    With respect, there is nothing in the article that seems to target veterans. I'm assuming that you are concerned with those who have returned with diagnosed PTSD, but I find no reference to that disorder nor to veterans specifically. Your title may be misleading.
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  4. #4
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    With respect, there is nothing in the article that seems to target veterans. I'm assuming that you are concerned with those who have returned with diagnosed PTSD, but I find no reference to that disorder nor to veterans specifically. Your title may be misleading.
    It is a thinly veiled attempt to disarm veterans. Mr Obama has absolutely no intentions to do anything meaningful in regards to reducing gun crime. He pushed to ban cosmetic features, he attempted to bargain away our rights to a foreign entity and when those failed, he went this route. Disarm the opposition and you have a one party system.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    With respect, there is nothing in the article that seems to target veterans. I'm assuming that you are concerned with those who have returned with diagnosed PTSD, but I find no reference to that disorder nor to veterans specifically. Your title may be misleading.
    Some folks go for the sensational thread title, even if they have nothing to support it.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    What is an Executive Action? These are not Executive Orders.

    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member cirrusly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    331
    I want to keep our founding fathers' visions and rights for this country pure. I implore you to do the same.

  8. #8
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...campaign=nl_pm

    FUQs:

    President Obama has released two new executive actions on background checks for gun purchases. The actions were posted on WhiteHouse.gov Friday afternoon and according to the Department of Justice and Health and Human Services, will make it easier for states to submit mental health information to the federal background check system known as the National Instant Criminal Background Check System or NICS.

    Today, the Administration is announcing two new executive actions that will help strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of the wrong hands. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a regulation to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons related to mental health, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a proposed regulation to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information on those persons to the federal background check system," the executive action announcement states. "The Administration’s two new executive actions will help ensure that better and more reliable information makes its way into the background check system. The Administration also continues to call on Congress to pass common-sense gun safety legislation and to expand funding to increase access to mental health services.

    While the President and the Vice President continue to do everything they can to reduce gun violence, Congress must also act. Passing common-sense gun safety legislation – including expanding background checks and making gun trafficking a federal crime – remains the most important step we can take to reduce gun violence.

    I wonder if Holder knows that he can't engage in gun trafficking any longer....
    Furthermore, if HIPPA doesnt matter and these things are now stored in a registry, does Obamacare even matter? Let's just ignore the laws we don't like.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    With respect, there is nothing in the article that seems to target veterans. I'm assuming that you are concerned with those who have returned with diagnosed PTSD, but I find no reference to that disorder nor to veterans specifically. Your title may be misleading.
    James and all,

    You are most definitely correct that the article doesn't specifically mention vets. Nevertheless, they are the bullseye of the target. Next is the rest of the American gun owners and eventually ALL of the American police are to be disarmed. This is exactly what I've been preaching about on this forum to which I was snubbed by our mis-moderator Gripeshot who locked my thread in which I explained in detail how mental health diagnoses will be used to strip millions of gun owners of their 2A rights. I explained that the American Psychiatric Association has just recently released the latest version of the DSM which contains a whole slew of new psychiatric disorders that I predict will be the main toll they will use to abolish the Second Amendment rights of many Americans. PTSD was the camel’s nose, and other mental health diagnoses that will ban gun ownership, like Paranoid Personality Disorder, Road Rage Disorder, and maybe even Psychosis Risk Syndromes will follow soon. We are now in what is called the calm before the storm. They just want to get the electronic medical record infrastructure completely in place first before passing the next “mental health” gun ban law.

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...tion-s-website

    Dave Hodges of the Common Sense Show just posted an article today about this new EO called "Obama’s Gun Confiscation Plans Are a Prelude to Genocide." in which he claims that "these new regulations are aimed at the veterans."

    "Obama’s Gun Confiscation Plans Are a Prelude to Genocide

    In the 1970′s, the civilized world criticized the Soviet Union for their designation of a new mental illness called “Political Schizophrenia”. Soviet style political schizophrenia was deemed to be inappropriate by ICD-9 because the Russians were labeling anyone who disagreed with the government as being mentally ill. And in Mother Russia, if you were deemed to be mentally ill, you were subsequently “treated” in the Gulag.

    Obama Employs Soviet Style Mental Health Gun Controls

    Under Obama’s new proposed gun regulations, anyone who has a diagnosable, or is potentially diagnosable for being mentally ill, can have their gun confiscated. Vice President Biden even feels that they can violate HIPPA privacy regulations in requiring the states to report who has been treated for a mental illness.

    What is interesting to me is that the Obama administration is not even trying to distinguish between mental illnesses in terms of who should, or should not own a gun. In the eyes of the Obama administration, all mental illnesses are created equal. A person with a phobia is just as dangerous as a sociopath. One in six Americans have a “diagnosable anxiety disorder”. This is completely understandable given the economic and political times that we live in. However, under the new proposed guidelines, all of these people would be ineligible to have a gun in their possession even though there is not a shred of research which indicates this population would be inclined towards gun violence any more than any other population.

    These New Regulations Are Aimed At the Veterans

    For months, the Veterans Administration has been sending out letters to veterans for them to report to the nearest VA hospital for psychiatric evaluation due to potential Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). These same letters are demanding that these veterans turn in their gun or risk losing their veteran benefits.

    Please allow me to point out the obvious. If you spend one to five tours of duty in Afghanistan, you are going to have some form of PTSD. Again, the Obama administration has not produced any replicable mental health research which suggests that people with PTSD are more likely than any random person to commit acts of violence with a gun. As an aside, what has been proven is that mass murderers are almost always on psychotropic medication. This brings up the notion that the “pharmacological cure” is more dangerous than the condition that is being treated, which is normally depression.

    The veterans have already been under attack by being labeled as domestic terrorists by the MIAC report. I always thought that being a veteran of combat would make him or her a hero in the eyes of the government. Instead, they are demonized when they are done with their active duty service. This makes no sense unless this criminal government thinks that they are going to have to fight these veterans as the noose of martial law tightens around the necks of the American people.

    There are 1.5 million veterans under the age of 35. They understand military tactics. They understand how to coordinate an attack. They understand guerrilla tactics and how to execute them. These veterans would be at the vanguard of any armed resistance against this criminal enterprise administration. Their numbers would be formidable because they know how to shoot straight. Add in 200+ command level military officers who have been fired by Obama and America could mount quite an insurgency force. These veterans must be disarmed and that is what underlies these ridiculous policies coming out of this present government.

    This whole argument about disarming the veterans is based upon a fallacy. Was the Columbine shooting committed by a mentally ill veteran? Was Sandy Hook committed by a mentally ill veteran? Was the Batman shooting committed by a mentally ill veteran? No, they were not! What each of the murderers had in common is that they were on prescribed psychotropic medication. Perhaps the Obama administration should focus on banning dangerous mental health medication rather than guns.

    New Psychiatric Guidelines to Judge Mental Illness

    The Obama administration has a new partner in crime and it is the American Psychiatric Association (APA). The APA created the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (5th Edition) which was recently adopted. DSM 5 is highly controversial and has sparked outrage from the mental health practitioners. As many of these practitioners point out, the new DSM-V makes a pathology out simple and normal behaviors such as the grieving for the loss of a loved one.

    Particularly disturbing is that the new manual targets internet users and conspiracy theorists. If someone is judged, by some vague set of criteria, to spend too much time on the internet, they could be judged to be mentally ill and ineligible to own a gun. How are you receiving this information? The chances are that you are, at least according to Obama and Biden, giving in to your internet addiction and reading this article. Under the new Obama guidelines this would be grounds for gun confiscation. The alternative media is predicated on internet readership and listenership. These would be among the first groups to oppose a martial law crackdown. Subsequently, this is just another backdoor method to disarm citizens who would oppose the abject tyranny being imposed upon America. And these facts sum up what is truly behind the Obama administration’s latest attack upon gun ownership because they want to prey upon a defenseless nation by disarming as many of us as possible before the purges can begin in earnest."

    Full article:

    http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/0...e-to-genocide/

  10. #10
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    The new proposed rule

    Here it is, from Holder's Dept of INjustice:

    Amended Definition of “Adjudicated as a Mental Defective” and “Committed to a Mental Institution” (2010R-21P)
    In addition, the Department proposes amending the definition of “committed to a mental institution” to clarify that involuntary commitment to a mental institution includes both inpatient and outpatient treatment. ATF has received inquiries as to whether the definition applies to involuntary outpatient treatment. Although the term “committed to a mental institution” is not defined in 18 U.S.C. 922, the plain language of the statute incorporates both inpatient and outpatient commitments as the statute requires commitment to a mental institution, not commitment in a mental institution. See United States v. B.H., 466 F. Supp. 2d 1139, 1147 (N.D. Iowa 2006). Mental institutions include mental health facilities and the auxiliary mental health services provided through those facilities.
    What that will mean is that anyone who was subject to an order to submit involuntarily to treatment on an outpatient basis will, like those committed to inpatient custody to a psych ward, become a prohibited person -- even if that was years or decades ago. Even if such persons are healthy now and are not a threat to others.

    How about relief from disability? Yeah, right.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    This unfortunately is why when I came home from deployments and they ask you 10000 questions I say nope nope nope nope. Are you healthy? Yup.

    From a personal perspective it sucks because my unit has lost 3 guys to suicide this last year alone. None went for help. Being ostracized by your peers is only one reason guys don't speak up and get help. Things like this is another reason. Fear of speaking up and then losing all your guns and job.

    Its a shame. Your damned if you do damned if you don't.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Yes, the denial is well established in the record here.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    Should you lose your gun rights if you visit a shrink? Obama FedGov vs. HIPPA TWT

    Will imposing gun bans on Americans who seek counseling “keep us safe”? Ask the 175,000 veterans who have lost their guns.

    Shortly before taking their constitutional rights away with no due process, the government had no problem issuing them fully automatic assault rifles and sending them out to patrol the streets of Baghdad and Kabul.

    "In a preternatural example of tone-deafness, an administration under fire for snooping into Americans’ privacy is now proposing to waive federal privacy laws so psychiatrists can report their gun-owning patients to the government. The Department of Health and Human Service’s “notice of proposed rule-making,” floated by the White House in a Friday media dump, would waive portions of the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to allow psychiatrists to report their patients to the FBI’s gun-ban blacklist (the NICS system) on the basis of confidential communications.

    [ ... ]

    "Although the problem hasn’t yet been as apparent in other areas, police and firemen on Social Security disability for post-traumatic stress disorder, Medicare seniors with Alzheimer’s, and people who as children were diagnosed under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act program with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder will ultimately face the same fate. Even a subsidized Obamacare policy might now make Americans participants in a federal program."

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...e-your-weapon/
    Last edited by Nightmare; 01-08-2014 at 12:44 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Would someone please point me to actual facts about the individual veterans that were involved in these actions?

    It takes more than just being diagnosed with PTSD for the VA to determine that you are incompetent to financially handle your disability payments.

    It is true that the VA has contributed, both directly and indirectly, to many veterans getting caught up in being sent for 72-hour holds for MH evaluation, but I have not seen any actual documentation that even that (when nothing else happened and the vet was released at the end of the 72 hours) has resulted in loss of 2A rights.

    I know it can happen. Just as I know the cops can pick me up and dump me in a mental hospital for turning right on a red light if they really wanted to. But I am still looking for documentation and coming up empty. Who are those vets and what are the specifics of their situation?

    Until that documentation is provided, I say this is just scare tactics.

    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

  15. #15
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690

    Not constitutional

    There is no constitutional provision for executive orders or "rule by decree."
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Author Michael E. Hammond is general counsel of the Gun Owners of America.

    1 August 2009 Congressional Research Service

    https://opencrs.com/

    http://www.phibetaiota.net/2013/07/c...rvice-catalog/
    Last edited by Nightmare; 01-08-2014 at 02:40 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Presidents have been issuing executive orders since 1789 even though the Constitution does not explicitly give them the right to do so. However, vague wording in Article II Section 1 and Article II Section 2 gives the president this privilege. Executive orders also include National Security directives and Homeland Security Presidential Directives.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Where does the 175,000 figure come from? It is a little hard to believe.

    What does "lost their guns" mean? It's kinda vague.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    The proposal is counterproductive. Now people who should seek out medical attention will not.

    Patient-doctor confidentiality should be paramount; I think that the law now intrudes too much into this.

    If the state thinks you are not mentally able to have a gun then they should make the case before a judge and without peeking into your own doctor's medical files.

    What they propose is simply laziness that will ensnare people unjustly.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430
    I don't think people should be able to be prohibited from owning firearms without due process via being adjudicated mentally defective before a court of law.

    The way we do that may or may not require updating as we are basically still in the Neolithic period of Psychiatry.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Kopis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    727
    i just did my CCW permit renewal and it had a lot of mental stability questions on it. I want to say around 8-12 questions. If i was taking any medication, sought treatment, depression, all kinds of stuff.

    i would also agree the legislation will probably be counter productive in that people will not get the treatment or medicine they need for fear of losing their rights.
    Last edited by Kopis; 01-08-2014 at 04:56 PM.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Author Michael E. Hammond is general counsel of the Gun Owners of America.

    1 August 2009 Congressional Research Service

    https://opencrs.com/

    http://www.phibetaiota.net/2013/07/c...rvice-catalog/
    If you have a specific citation, please post it. Both your links lead only to search engines. And Mr. Hammond's current employment does nothing to provide specific information.

    Try again. (Yes, I am intentionally being mean and nasty. What of it?)

    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

  23. #23
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The proposal is counterproductive. Now people who should seek out medical attention will not.

    Patient-doctor confidentiality should be paramount; I think that the law now intrudes too much into this.

    If the state thinks you are not mentally able to have a gun then they should make the case before a judge and without peeking into your own doctor's medical files.

    What they propose is simply laziness that will ensnare people unjustly.
    If a "law" is unconstitutional, it should be challenged. Its a shame that so many politicians turn a blind eye in the hope that the post constitutional republic regime that rises out of the ashes might expand their personal power.

    Sent using Tapatalk 2.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    It takes more than just being diagnosed with PTSD for the VA to determine that you are incompetent to financially handle your disability payments.
    But a diagnosis of PTSD does put you on the prohibited possessor list for life. Even if the so-called mental illness is successfully treated, once diagnosed you loose your right to own guns for life. The law in question here is the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (HR 2640).

    And HR 2640 goes even further as adjudication of mental illness no longer is a finding done in a courtroom with due process, it now includes nothing more than just a finding by “a court, commission, committee or other authorized person” such as a psychiatrist, psychologist, physician, physician’s assistant, or even a nurse practitioner.

    Hence, if an “authorized person” determines you have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Alzheimer’s, Schizophrenia, Bipolar, Major Depression, or a myriad of other mental health disorders, then, under the new interpretation, you may be subject to a lifetime gun ban because the term “adjudication” now includes a diagnosis, as opposed to a court order.

    Also, HR2640 has redefined the term “mental defective” to include anyone who has been determined to be “a danger to himself or to others; or who lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.” In a letter dated May 9th, 2007, the BATFE wrote that “danger” means “any” danger, not “imminent” or “substantial danger.”

    And Section 101 (c) (1) (C) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 makes this even clearer, and goes even further. It provides that a person can be made a prohibited possessor, based "solely on a medical finding of disability" even if that finding is based on a microscopic amount of danger or inability to manage one’s affairs.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Augustin View Post
    But a diagnosis of PTSD does put you on the prohibited possessor list for life. Even if the so-called mental illness is successfully treated, once diagnosed you loose your right to own guns for life. The law in question here is the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (HR 2640).

    And HR 2640 goes even further as adjudication of mental illness no longer is a finding done in a courtroom with due process, it now includes nothing more than just a finding by “a court, commission, committee or other authorized person” such as a psychiatrist, psychologist, physician, physician’s assistant, or even a nurse practitioner.

    Hence, if an “authorized person” determines you have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Alzheimer’s, Schizophrenia, Bipolar, Major Depression, or a myriad of other mental health disorders, then, under the new interpretation, you may be subject to a lifetime gun ban because the term “adjudication” now includes a diagnosis, as opposed to a court order.

    Also, HR2640 has redefined the term “mental defective” to include anyone who has been determined to be “a danger to himself or to others; or who lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.” In a letter dated May 9th, 2007, the BATFE wrote that “danger” means “any” danger, not “imminent” or “substantial danger.”

    And Section 101 (c) (1) (C) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 makes this even clearer, and goes even further. It provides that a person can be made a prohibited possessor, based "solely on a medical finding of disability" even if that finding is based on a microscopic amount of danger or inability to manage one’s affairs.
    Please cite the specific section of these laws that says that what you say will/does happen. Same request goes for "the new interpretation" - who is making it and what cases are there that show this interpretation being upheld.

    To help you, here is a link to the Act. Copy & paste the sections you believe say whay you are asserting. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hr2640/text

    stay safe.
    Last edited by skidmark; 01-11-2014 at 06:39 PM.
    "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

Posting Permissions

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