Posted on 02/21/2013 8:00:07 PM PST by wesagain
Who are you really? It is maybe a little less sinister than satin himself, wake up.
You stated; “I support veterans being subject to the same rules as everyone else.” Correct? The whole of PTSD Vets under Clinton, were absolutely not treated the same, as everyone else. The current expansive renewal of that policy, flies in the face, of your qualifying statement.
I think you yourself misunderstand where you are coming from. Wake up.
Well then you have turned in your weapons already, right?
As I explained in all my subsequent posts, I am a disabled veteran with PTSD who recognizes that there should be a mechanism to ensure the safety of veterans who are found incompetent to care for themselves.
I believe that mechanism should be the courts, not the VA. I believe the current system is just waiting to be abused. I believe it probably is abused. I just don't think there is a widespread attempt by VA to disarm veterans (yet). I believe this power should be taken from VA so that they cannot attempt the widespread disarming of veterans.
Who are you, really?
Why are you doing this? Did I, in any of my posts, advocate the disarming of veterans with PTSD? No, I didn't. You are being misleading.
Maybe I failed to mention that my husband is a disabled veteran. He is incapable of handling his own finances. He is incompetent. I am his caregiver.
Based on that limited information, you have advocated putting him under investigation for the purpose of depriving him of his 2nd Amendment rights. Not because there is any probable cause, or likelihood that he cannot or should not handle a firearm, but because he’s a military veteran who cannot manage a household.
He cannot balance a checkbook. He cannot cook meals or do much housework. But he can handle his firearms, and do his own reloading. He knows better than to go on a shooting spree. He knows better than to violate others’ rights, even when he can. But there is no reason he should have to prove any of that, in court or a bureaucrat’s office, because he has done nothing to raise any reasonable suspicion. There is no reason to suspect that just because a veteran is disabled they are any more likely than anyone else to abuse their 2nd Amendment rights. In this country, we do not open fishing expedition type investigations against people for the purpose of taking punitive action against them if there is not a reason.
We do not investigate every civilian who checks NO to the question “Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective...?” Even if they can’t sign their name on the form for whatever reason, we don’t open an investigation. They could be blind, illiterate, or just deliberately difficult, and we do not open an investigation into their mental/emotional/medical state with the goal of revoking their right to purchase the firearm. And there’s no reason we should, unless they display some evidence worthy of an investigation. The 4th Amendment prohibits such abuse.
If no court has judged them to be a danger to themselves or others, then yes, I support their right to possess firearms.
If there is no reasonable suspicion that an investigation would result in such a ruling, there should be no such investigation.
As a fellow veteran, I salute your husband and thank him for his service, sincerely.
Based on that limited information, you have advocated putting him under investigation for the purpose of depriving him of his 2nd Amendment rights.
This is the miscommunication between us. I advocate no such thing. I have explained the current VA rationale for what it does, and stated that I do not believe that currently they are waging a campaign to disarm veterans.
I believe that there are some veterans (and non-veterans) who are too mentally incompetent to possess firearms, namely those people who are devoid of rational thought and literally too incompetent to care for themselves. This does not include your husband as you have described. I believe that the current system, where VA proposes, then determines (based on its own proposal) to restrict firearm rights encourages VA to propose restrictions on people like your husband who should not be restricted. What has VA got to lose? They simply propose to take his guns, then have a "hearing", then take them.
By moving the determination to the courts, VA must assemble its evidence FIRST, rather than having a hearing requiring your husband to prove his evidence to the contrary.
I am not in any way actively endorsing any power to the VA, or against veterans. Maybe I have failed to explain this properly based on some of the responses I've gotten. I simply mean to say that there are, in our society, people who are so mentally impaired that they must be disarmed for their own safety, and that that determination should always be made by a court, not a bureaucrat.
My comments about what VA does now are simply explanatory.
I like that!
I support the expansion of the policy. I agree they were not treated the same under Clinton. I support veterans being subject to the same rules as everyone else. What the hell are you talking about?
Blam is right. Most people with PTSD tend to isolate. They just want to be left alone. PTSD is an extreme anxiety disorder - I think the people who go on these rampages are psychotic, and definitely not dealing with PTSD.
I meant to agree with you in my post 93.
I had a VA Dr. basically tell me that this was going to happen 2 years ago if the bastard was reelected. I was told not to say too much and that certain things could prevent me from obtaining or owning a weapon in the future. Why can’t the libtards understand that the reason the US hasn’t been invaded is because we have a 100 million-plus member armed militia and that if they push too hard, nothing they can do will prevent their overthrow? Wolverines, time to lock and load! FUBO
Any the phony support the troops speeches and stories from Obummer are a smokescreen.
This administration has declared war on our military and our veterans. This is further proof.
I second you post but add; It’s not the PTSD in most cases ... it’s Celexa; Lexapro; Luvox; Paxil; Prozac; Zoloft; et al … Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors the infamous SSRIs’
I would add that women who have PTSD due to rape are they to be dis-armed also?
They way to beat their contention is to blame Big Pharma
and then see how fast the issue drops.
Due process isn’t lost. The VA is an administrative agency, meaning Congress has authorized them to do a variety of things, including make rules and hold hearings. The letter explains how to object. And if you still don’t like what the agency decides, you can go to court.
My guess is that the VA is acting legally under the laws Congress wrote.
What privilege are you talking about?
A driver’s license is a “privilege.”
Gun ownership is a God given right set forth in the Bill of Rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.