Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DeathBeforeDishonor1
If an article from Bearing Arms did not need to be excerpted, here's more from the article.

------------ Begin Quote --------------------

Unfortunately, there is every reason to suspect that under this Administration that the goal is to merely ensure that more people are labeled as mentally ill to deny them gun rights without getting them any actual help. This is incredibly cynical, and will not help save lives. The part where he used the Social Security Administration as a weapon

Obama has been consistent in his attempts to use the Veterans Administration and the Social Security Administration to deny citizens their gun rights if they have been declared unable to take care of their affairs.

Include information from the Social Security Administration in the background check system about beneficiaries who are prohibited from possessing a firearm. Current law prohibits individuals from buying a gun if, because of a mental health issue, they are either a danger to themselves or others or are unable to manage their own affairs. The Social Security Administration (SSA) has indicated that it will begin the rulemaking process to ensure that appropriate information in its records is reported to NICS. The reporting that SSA, in consultation with the Department of Justice, is expected to require will cover appropriate records of the approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment, or who have been found by a state or federal court to be legally incompetent. The rulemaking will also provide a mechanism for people to seek relief from the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm for reasons related to mental health.


If we were only talking about people with advanced dementia who were seeing ghosts and could be considered a legitimate threat to themselves or others, then that would potentially be a good move... but that's not what this is.

Obama is casting his net as wide as possible to ensnare folks who have short-term memory loss issues, who are recovering from strokes, etc. If, for any reason, you cannot "manage your own affairs" on even a temporary basis, a faceless government bureaucrat can strip you of your constitutional rights under this despicable plot.

This isn't just spiteful, it's abusive.
Trust us, we're from the government

The devil is going to be in the details on this one...

Remove unnecessary legal barriers preventing States from reporting relevant information to the background check system. Although States generally report criminal history information to NICS, many continue to report little information about individuals who are prohibited by Federal law from possessing or receiving a gun for specific mental health reasons. Some State officials raised concerns about whether such reporting would be precluded by the Privacy Rule issued under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Today, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a final rule expressly permitting certain HIPAA covered entities to provide to the NICS limited demographic and other necessary information about these individuals.


Expect the Obama Administration to attempt to use temporary problems--people who enter into one-time treatment to deal with personal trauma or bereavement issues--to create lifetime bans on gun ownership.

Once again, evil.

------------- End Quote ------------------


12 posted on 01/05/2016 1:55:21 PM PST by familyop ("Welcome to Costco. I love you." --Costco greeter in "Idiocracy," example of today's politico.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: familyop
Make sure you are not a "registered" Republican. The RNC will probably offer up the voter rolls to dear leader.

Clearly they will be used to indicate mental incompetence.

23 posted on 01/05/2016 3:21:23 PM PST by SuperLuminal (Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: familyop

A question about the state reporting part: it’s voluntary, right?

So removing “legal barriers” still doesn’t compel a state to report, right?

This should be expected to trigger calls for increased vigilance at the state-level about this kind of reporting. “We don’t trust the Federal Government with our data, therefore won’t provide it” is an absolutely appropriate stance for a state to take here. And Conservatives dominate at the state level.


38 posted on 01/06/2016 8:27:07 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson