Mr.Advocate
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Thax, I'm looking it up right now
Thax, I'm looking it up right now
Hooah, thats for your service to my fell B.I.A's, I was in the Army for six, I'd still be in and a lifer in the army but after Iraq things changed severly for me. Thats why I'm hitting this HR 2640 so hardlyYes, I'm a vet of 8 yrs active duty and 4 years reserve.
I got a notification from the VA that I would not be able to own firearms. The only adjudication was a disability hearing at which my medical records were sited a number of times. From what I can gather, they are saying that because I have a disability, I am mentally defective. Better take away my car, my baseball bat, my bed sheets, pencils, gum, etc. After all, they are all threats to my life and the lives of others. (Give me a break.)
Now the text of C from the enrolled bill:(C) the adjudication, determination, or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without a finding that the person is a danger to himself or to others or that the person lacks the mental capacity to manage his own affairs.
Text of 922(g)(4) of Title 18, USC:(C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, except that nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall prevent a Federal department or agency from providing to the Attorney General any record demonstrating that a person was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) who is a fugitive from justice; (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); (4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;
HR2640 was going to move through the House quickly before the NRA ever got involved. in it's present form, there was no way for a Veteran to get off of the list once they were added. The NRA stepped in at that point and insisted that there must be a procedure to be removed from the list and at theStates expense, not the individuals.
Had the NRA not got involved, the bill would have passed with no provisions for getting off of the list.
Getting put on a list for having mental heath issues could not be stopped. Adding a way to get off that list needed to be done. Thats what the NRA did. You can call it a sellout if you wish, but I know a few veterans that don't see it that way.
1stfreedom wrote:HR2640
You can call it a sellout if you wish, but I know a few veterans that don't see it that way.
I didn't see it that way either. Furthermore I find a lot of this PTSD disgusting. I've see soldiers cry about being within 100 meters of an impact just to get disability. Depression used to be something people struggled through on their own, now it's a clinical issue that no one can seem to cure,so it's treated withdrugs... FOREVER, talk about job security. ADD is total BS too. Some kids are just not going to be robotic little book worms, and some of them just need their butts whippped.
These "mental conditions" were not "mental disorders" until someone decided they could make money from it.
That being said, some folks do really have PTSD, guys that had to light up a truck that breeched security and found it full of pregnant mothers and kids are going to need some council for sure. This shouldn't be a life long struggle though. We had millions of WW2 veterans who saw things just as bad or worse than most can imagine, who eventually got past it and went on with their lives.
The point is, if you are going to go through the government for treatment of things that aren't really issues, be prepared to get screwed. After rotating to the states from OIF 3 it seemed like we were being begged to get on some kind of disability. Those guys who did found out their $100 a month "disability" cost them some really good jobs.
I find a lot of this PTSD disgusting.These "mental conditions" were not "mental disorders" until someone decided they could make money from it.
That being said, some folks do really have PTSD, guys that had to light up a truck that breached security and found it full of pregnant mothers and kids are going to need some council for sure. This shouldn't be a life long struggle though. We had millions of WW2 veterans who saw things just as bad or worse than most can imagine, who eventually got past it and went on with their lives.
After rotating to the states from OIF 3 it seemed like we were being begged to get on some kind of disability. Those guys who did found out their $100 a month "disability" cost them some really good jobs.
I'll feel better about this when I see something that's not from 2007. :XMr.Advocate wrote:I wholeheartedly DO hope I am right, and I realize that there may be wording that I have not yet fully understood, but I really do not think so.
Relieved , found something new from militarydotcom, I think your right, but I don't know where I was reading before, I even had it printed out, but I misplaced it.
If the definition of "mentally adjudicated" being used for NICS inclusion allows a simple diagnosis by a physician, I am fairly certain that it should be cause for removal from the NICS list, specifically due to the wording of HR2640.
Hold on a minute or two let me see if I can find something more current Abnowrightme wrote:I'll feel better about this when I see something that's not from 2007. :XMr.Advocate wrote:I wholeheartedly DO hope I am right, and I realize that there may be wording that I have not yet fully understood, but I really do not think so.
Relieved , found something new from militarydotcom, I think your right, but I don't know where I was reading before, I even had it printed out, but I misplaced it.
If the definition of "mentally adjudicated" being used for NICS inclusion allows a simple diagnosis by a physician, I am fairly certain that it should be cause for removal from the NICS list, specifically due to the wording of HR2640.
And when did you recieve that notice? I'm 30% disabled myself, after serving 25 years, never been diagnosed with PTSD tho'. Fight it Bro' and good luck!!I got a notification from the VA that I would not be able to own firearms. The only adjudication was a disability hearing at which my medical records were sited a number of times. From what I can gather, they are saying that because I have a disability, I am mentally defective. Better take away my car, my baseball bat, my bed sheets, pencils, gum, etc. After all, they are all threats to my life and the lives of others. (Give me a break.)
Its looks to be as if the damn bill passed sometime late 07 to early 08, but if we were placed on the (NICS) list we do have a right to regain our 2nd Amendment Rights from what I've read. But if this bill really went through all the way like it says, I haven't found any new revised later08 early 09 edition, then there shouldn't be a problem, I just got finished purchasing a firearm not more than three weeks ago and everything came back fine. I also read both it would not place vets with PTSD on the list, but on other sites I read it would, and that we would have to regain our rights by applying for them, talk about some bs, I'll be going for my 5th consecutive ccw permit here in the next couple days, I'll tell you how it goes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y32vseP7T58&NR=1
this video from your tube with Larry Pratt from the GOA talks a bit about the Veterans Disarament Act-not what you will hear if your a veteran might just make you feel like a second class citizen, The GOA is for us, but not those who made the decision about 2640, the GOA is in the process from what I hear about getting a repeal on the part that hits all service men and woman.
HR 2640 did not cause PTSD vets to be newly banned, but it does provide for accurate and timely records transmittal. No new class of prohibited persons was created by HR2640.