My ex-wife is seeking sole custody of our 3 year old son because I open carry in my home in Sacramento CA. We had a custody mediation and the mediator said that although I am lawfully allowed to do so, he believes that I am wrong for carrying at home around my child and he is recommending to the court that I keep my gun locked up at all times. I even handed him a copy of PC 12025 and 12026 which he just wrote off. When my son is not at my home I keep my gun on the nightstand while I am in bed. Is that legal? Also, I was Army Infantry from 2005-2009 with a tour in Iraq in 2007 (honorable discharge). I have been diagnosed with PTSD because I have nightmares. The mediator is using this against me saying that my PTSD is the reason that I carry a gun and that I need counseling. I can't afford an attorney. Does anyone know of a way to get an attorney pro bono or cheap? Am I in accordance with the law? Will the judge agree with me or rule based on opinion? I need help so any info would be much appreciated.
This is somewhat related, although it won't help in any way with your case. That kind of advice is better left to lawyers, and I am not a lawyer.
But, when I was in the process of retiring, the docs tried to tack on PTSD to my records simply because I had trouble sleeping. Personally I feel it's in no way connected to military service, but the DA/ VA has been trying to tack on PTSD ever since Bush changed the rules somewhat in the mid- 2000s. His intentions were good, trying to make it easier for Veterans that needed help to get it, as well as smoothing the road for related benefits.
But, it also has unintended consequences. A PTSD diagnosis can affect (in some states) the application process for concealed permits (whatever they are called in the different states) as well as buying permits (if a person's state required them).
I can only think that one's officially diagnosed mental issues will be further scrutinized in the coming years, especially with more and more public calls to attention to shootings such as the one in Arizona that involved a US Congresswoman. I can't help but feel that a person's official medical records (especially those that deal with their mental health) will be official fodder both on the federal and state level more and more in the future.
As it turned out, I did not allow for any mention of PTSD in my final records. For one, I thought that it was not a proper diagnosis. For two, I did not want any mention of it in records that could possibly be used against me in determining my capacity to either work or to buy anything related to guns in the future.
By all means, if PTSD is something people are dealing with, I encourage everyone to seek the help that's out there. Access and care has greatly improved especially in the past 5-10 years or so. For those who need it, help is there and it's easier to get than ever before.
However, I would also highly suggest that people take a good look at circumstances where it may be tacked onto your records unduly, simply because the government wants to "help" you out in scenarios where they may be pushing it on you without regard to a proper diagnosis.
In other words, if anyone thinks that by putting it in your records simply because you can get more from the VA, it may work out as a detriment rather than something that helps in the long run.
I want to stress that I am speaking in
general terms to the open forum, and
not addressing any individual specifically.
*edited to correct my error in writing that California was the location of the recent shooting of a US Congresswoman. It now correctly states that the shooting happened in AZ. Blame it on the early hour.
. 
