Posted on 12/23/2007 12:28:24 PM PST by kellynla
Congress has given gun owners in America a Christmas gift: a blade in the back, according to officials with Gun Owners of America.
The organization said the plan supported by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and others, and known as the Veterans Disarmament Act by opponents, is being forwarded now to President Bush.
While other gun groups have endorsed H.R. 2640, a comprehensive plan to expand the powers of the Brady Bill gun restriction plan, Gun Owners of America has opposed it vigorously, and described its provisions for banning individuals, especially veterans, from owning guns as unreasonable.
"The core of the bill's problems is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a 'prohibited person' on the basis of a 'medical finding of disability,' so long as a veteran had an 'opportunity' for some sort of 'hearing' before some 'lawful authority' (other than a court)," the organization said in a new criticism of the plan. "Presumably, this 'lawful authority' could even be the psychiatrist himself," the organization said.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Yes, kellynla. That’s they only way they will get mine too. Merry Christmas kellynla to you and all of yours.
Thanks, a very Merry Christmas to you & yours!
Semper Fi
Kelly
They know it, too. The Left will always hide behind some "law" and never try to do the dirty work they want done themselves.
The Left had better fear the American Patriot. We will never go easily nor quietly into obscurity.
That is EXACTLY what will happen unless it is ... "They'll take my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers" and all my neighbors cold dead hands too ...
Which in my neighborhood ... it would be
According to the Left, veterans are probably automatically considered mentally disabled by virtue of having once served their country.
WorldNUTdaily takes great pride in misrepresenting, over-hyping, and quoting things out of context.
The real truth is that there are already *existing* prohibitions on veterans owning guns if they’ve ever had the briefest mention of combat stress or post traumatic stress on their record...and the bill in question allows our veterans to expunge any such mention of “illness” if they’ve had no civilian violent incidents over the past few years.
Which is to say, this bill will **repeal** the existing federal de facto bans on veteran gun ownership.
WorldNUTdaily simply spins it as something that it’s not in order to drum up hits to their pathetic web site.
Schumer wasn’t even the force behind this bill...it was written by staunch pro-gun-ally Coburn. So WorldNUTdaily even got that part wrong.
It should be renamed the “Veteran’s Administration Avoidance Act”. A veteran would have to be insane to seek any aid from the government for fear that an anti-gun bureaucrat could strip him of his right to keep and bear arms.
Wonder if we’ll all be ordered to get evaluated this coming year..?
All Southroners are crazy,,say around 90% own guns,,
Hell's bells and little catfish! This is an NRA crafted bill.
Welcome to FR. You’re having a good first day here, and I hope you have many more.
What tends to run higher (% wise) in Veterans than in the normal population. IMHO, its patriotism and this is another step of the left vilifying that which makes America great. Bush will sign this.
IMO, its time to start interviewing any doctor we see to see their stance. Do not subject yourself to any doctor who supports gun control.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Gun Owners of America and its supporters took a knife in the back yesterday, as Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) out-smarted his congressional opposition into agreeing on a so-called “compromise” on HR 2640 — a bill which now goes to the President’s desk.
The bill — known as the Veterans Disarmament Act to its opponents — is being praised by the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign.
The Brady Bunch crowed “Victory! U.S. Congress Strengthens Brady Background Check System.” The NRA stated that last minute changes to the McCarthy bill made a “good bill even better [and that] the end product is a win for American gun owners.”
But Gun Owners of America has issued public statements decrying this legislation.
The core of the bill’s problems is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a “prohibited person” on the basis of a “medical finding of disability,” so long as a veteran had an “opportunity” for some sort of “hearing” before some “lawful authority” (other than a court). Presumably, this “lawful authority” could even be the psychiatrist himself.
Note that unlike with an accused murderer, the hearing doesn’t have to occur. The “lawful authority” doesn’t have to be unbiased. The veteran is not necessarily entitled to an attorney — much less an attorney financed by the government.
So what do the proponents have to say about this?
ARGUMENT: The Veterans Disarmament Act creates new avenues for prohibited persons to seek restoration of their gun rights.
ANSWER: What the bill does is to lock in — statutorily — huge numbers of additional law-abiding Americans who will now be denied the right to own a firearm.
And then it “graciously” allows these newly disarmed Americans to spend tens of thousands of dollars for a long-shot chance to regain the gun rights this very bill takes away from them.
More to the point, what minimal gains were granted by the “right hand” are taken away by the “left.” Section 105 provides a process for some Americans diagnosed with so-called mental disabilities to get their rights restored in the state where they live. But then, in subsection (a)(2), the bill stipulates that such relief may occur only if “the person will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the GRANTING OF THE RELIEF WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.” (Emphasis added.)
Um, doesn’t this language sound similar to those state codes (like California’s) that have “may issue” concealed carry laws — where citizens “technically” have the right to carry, but state law only says that sheriffs MAY ISSUE them a permit to carry? When given such leeway, those sheriffs usually don’t grant the permits!
Prediction: liberal states — the same states that took these people’s rights away — will treat almost every person who has been illegitimately denied as a danger to society and claim that granting relief would be “contrary to the public interest.”
Let’s make one thing clear: the efforts begun during the Clinton Presidency to disarm battle-scarred veterans — promoted by the Brady Anti-Gun Campaign — is illegal and morally reprehensible.
But section 101(c)(1)(C) of HR 2640 would rubber-stamp those illegal actions. Over 140,000 law-abiding veterans would be statutorily barred from possessing firearms.
True, they can hire a lawyer and beg the agency that took their rights away to voluntarily give them back. But the agency doesn’t have to do anything but sit on its hands. And, after 365 days of inaction, guess what happens? The newly disarmed veteran can spend thousands of additional dollars to sue. And, as the plaintiff, the wrongly disarmed veteran has the burden of proof.
Language proposed by GOA would have automatically restored a veteran’s gun rights if the agency sat on its hands for a year. Unfortunately, the GOA amendment was not included.
The Veterans Disarmament Act passed the Senate and the House yesterday — both times WITHOUT A RECORDED VOTE. That is, the bill passed by Unanimous Consent, and was then transmitted to the White House.
Long-time GOA activists will remember that a similar “compromise” deal helped the original Brady Law get passed. In 1993, there were only two or three senators on the floor of that chamber who used a Unanimous Consent agreement (with no recorded vote) to send the Brady bill to President Clinton — at a time when most legislators had already left town for their Thanksgiving Break.
Gun owners can go to http://www.gunowners.org/news/nws9402.htm to read about how this betrayal occurred 14 years ago.
With your help, Gun Owners of America has done a yeoman’s job of fighting gun control over the years, considering the limited resources that we have. Together, we were able to buck the Brady Campaign/NRA coalition in 1999 (after the Columbine massacre) and were able to defeat the gun control that was proposed in the wake of that shooting.
Yesterday, we were not so lucky. But we are not going to go away. GOA wants to repeal the gun-free zones that disarm law-abiding Americans and repeal the other gun restrictions that are on the books. That is the answer to Virginia Tech. Unfortunately, the House and Senate chose the path of imposing more gun control.
So our appeal to you is this — please help us to grow this coming year. Please help us to get more members and activists. If you add $10 to your membership renewal this year, we can reach new gun owners in the mail and tell them about GOA.
Please urge your friends to join GOA... and, at the very least, make sure they sign up for our free e-mail alerts so that we can mobilize more gun owners than ever before!
http://www.gunowners.org/a122007.htm
Merry Christmas and welcome to FR
This is the kind of stuff that I’m afraid of, if I try to collect disability. 0.o
Thank you for your service. God Bless you and Merry Christmas. If you don’t mind me asking, are you still in the military or did you just get out with a medical waiver?
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.