• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

So if your getting SSI income from the government means you can't own a firearm?

phoneguy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
445
Location
, ,
Is this a joke? I hope when Trump is president he will change this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,331
Location
Valhalla
Is this a joke? I hope when Trump is president he will change this.
Cite please.

There has been talk about those receiving disability income being so effected, but nothing definitive to my knowledge.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,190
Location
here nc
your title of the thread seems to be misleading ~ especially since as the articles point out, it only affects 100K or 1% of the 9.4M vets getting ssi. (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n2/v66n2p1.html)

and to put two cites (darn, i'm impressed even one the resident alt-righter hasn't used) w/o commentary seems a bit vague?

so your point that out of 9.4M vets who get SSI and this according to your NRA concerns 100K (1% of the total vets) individuals who are under guardianship, of their affairs.

a side note, the NRA's article starts off with 100K then stated unequivically 4m are going to be denied???

so OP, whatcha want to discuss about this ?

ipse
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,331
Location
Valhalla

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,190
Location
here nc
"Under these final rules, we will identify, on a prospective basis, individuals who receive Disability Insurance benefits under title II of the Social Security Act (Act) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments under title XVI of the Act and who also meet certain other criteria, including an award of benefits based on a finding that the individual’s mental impairment meets or medically equals the requirements of section 12.00 of the Listing of Impairments (Listings) and receipt of benefits through a representative payee."

just to help ya along there: SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 20 CFR Part 421,[Docket No. SSA-2016-0011]

DATES: This final rule will be effective on [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. However, compliance is not required until [INSERT DATE 365 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]

https://www.ssa.gov/regulations/SSA NICS Final Rule (To Publish 12-19-16).pdf

ipse
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
oh please..., really...shock and awe BS...

you believe this crap? then you are in for quite the shock when you discover the easter bunny and santa do not exist!!

ipse

Some folks think DJT is Santa and the Easter bunny... The alt-right think he is Jesus.. As for me, " I am loth to risk a conjecture about DJT. He is such an unintelligible human being that no rule of interpretation can possibly be found out by which to unravel his designs".

No he is not Santa, or the Easter bunny or Jesus, however the anti-christ is a possibility..

My .02
 

Ezek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
411
Location
missouri
Some folks think DJT is Santa and the Easter bunny... The alt-right think he is Jesus.. As for me, " I am loth to risk a conjecture about DJT. He is such an unintelligible human being that no rule of interpretation can possibly be found out by which to unravel his designs".

No he is not Santa, or the Easter bunny or Jesus, however the anti-christ is a possibility..

My .02

well... I will tell you what he isn't, another candidate of promoting the same establishment crap of the status quo of the feds.

at least not yet.

I do however think he is a schiester, as is evidenced by his many lawsuits with him labeled as defendant, end result, he should have a much closer eye on him.
 
Last edited:

xd shooter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
337
Location
usa
I think we're conflating two issues, with the same results...

The VA is ALREADY submitting names of Veterans to NICS who have been deemed unable to handle their affairs and have a fiduciary handle their benefits. Therefore they cannot own or handle any weapons or ammunition.

SSI is now beginning to do the same.

At issue here is the fact that these people have NOT been adjudicated as mentally incompetent, this being assigned a fiduciary can be done by a simple signature from a doctor, and rumor has it, from a Nurses recommendation as well.... Now I have great respect for doctors and nurses, but I do NOT believe they have the legal right to take anyone's rights away with out due process...
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
I think we're conflating two issues, with the same results...

The VA is ALREADY submitting names of Veterans to NICS who have been deemed unable to handle their affairs and have a fiduciary handle their benefits. Therefore they cannot own or handle any weapons or ammunition.

SSI is now beginning to do the same.

At issue here is the fact that these people have NOT been adjudicated as mentally incompetent, this being assigned a fiduciary can be done by a simple signature from a doctor, and rumor has it, from a Nurses recommendation as well.... Now I have great respect for doctors and nurses, but I do NOT believe they have the legal right to take anyone's rights away with out due process...

Correct. They are different standards totally. What you expect from lizzurds?
 

Ezek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
411
Location
missouri
First of all "schiester[sic]" or more properly, shyster, is a denigrating epithet for a lawyer, and I don't believe Trump has any interests as a lawyer.
Then you must differentiate Trump from his businesses. Trump uses the law to his own ends, as he should, and his opponents call him a legal bully. Trump is named in less than 200 Federal cases and in less than 200 Florida Circuit Court cases. Of these and others, 500 cases against Trump have been dismissed, and in many more the public record of the resolution is less than clear for the complexity. Where the public record of the resolutions of his cases is clear, Trump has won 451 to 34 losses. This is well documented and available to anyone with a search engine.

The volume of Trump businesses legal issues is correlated with the volume of his businesses and indicative of nothing other than of our litigious society. I would compare it to the ease with which OCDO habitués admit to non-consensual interactions with cops, and which is to me astounding!

All that said, do not suggest that I have any great expectations of Trump, of those he has vastly satisfied the majority. He is a fork in the Future Knowledge Fallacy 'road', the "road less traveled by" the progressive multi-culturists and dingy snowflakes. Hell's a poppin' for them. Bwahahaha!

it also has duality in meaning, it could also represent someone who is a conman, which many lawyers are perceived to be, and which trump himself has somewhat proven himself to be as a business entrepreneur.

this moral lack in his character is of my observation and opinion, and makes me wary of his role, and his cabinet selections. and in many ways makes him as just of much a politician as the status quo.

the only real difference, is trump is much more outgoing with his stuff Via twitter, and lacks the necessary KYBMS for cover ups like a politician does.
 
Top