GOP Senator Wants Guns for the Mentally Unstable

What could possibly go wrong?
Senator Burr Wants Guns for the Mentally Unstable

Quote :

U.S. Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, is preparing to introduce legislation in Washington, D.C., that will make it easier for mentally incapacitated veterans to regain access to guns. Hello? Anybody home? We just saw, and some experienced first hand, what could happen when you give a gun to someone who mentally is not playing with a full deck. But that’s not enough for Senator Burr. He wants to hand over guns even to those veterans judged mentally incapacitated or mentally incompetent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the Justice Department. Can you imagine telling this to the families of the victims and survivors of Fort Hood? Like salt to a wound. Let’s just hope Senator Burr got the wake up call, loud and clear - like a rooster on Red Bull.

Republican or not, HUH? What the heck!

That is a gross misrepresentation.
The Law currently says that a person that has been adjucitated mentally incompetant, or a potential harm to themselves or others cannot purchase a firearm.
What happened was that some pinhead at the VA decided that anyone that had seen a mental health professional fit the category, nevermind that adjudicated has a specific, legal, meaning.
The result was that some veterans were wrongfully denied their right based on an incorrect ruling by the VA. The bill seeks to correct that wrong.
Just because you have seen a mental health professional, doesn't mean that you are incompetent or a danger.

Exactly. Now if we could get stupid people to not have kids or guns.....

Regulations implementing the Gun Control Act of 1968 bar gun possession by anyone who “[i]s a danger to himself or to others; or [l]acks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs” due to mental illness.6 The legislation would override standards used by the VA for nearly four decades to determine mental illness.7 Current federal law and VA procedures ensure that only seriously mentally ill persons are barred from gun possession:
• Significant Medical Evidence Required – Evidence must be “clear, convincing and leave[] no doubt as to the person’s incompetency” or based on specific medical findings and show that the person “lacks the mental capacity to contract or to manage his or her own affairs.”8
• High Burden of Proof – “Where reasonable doubt arises … such doubt will be resolved in favor of competency.”9
• Due Process Protected – A person declared incompetent must receive notice and an opportunity for a hearing.10
• Gun Possession Allowed if Competency Restored – Any person who regains competency may again possess firearms.1
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/fedleg/HR2547-fact-sheet.pdf

As a life member of the VFW, a member of the American Legion, a life member of the North American Hunting Club and a member of the NRA I have been following this situation since it reated it's ugly head.
The VA procedures, as written are good procedures. The problem is that someone at the VA decided that anyone who has seen a mental health professional, for any reason was to be reported as mentally ill. This included someone that went to a counsellor to deal with things such as stress, survivor guilt and depression caused by seperation from family.
We should all know that just because a person sees a mental health professional doesn't mean they are "mentally ill" as meant by the gun control laws.

From the press release found on the Senator's website:

Quote :

Today, U.S. Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), along with 14 other cosponsors, introduced legislation that would end an arbitrary process through which the government strips veterans and other Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) beneficiaries of their Second Amendment rights. Under current practice, veterans who have a fiduciary appointed to act on their behalf are deemed “mentally defective” and are reported to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a system which prevents individuals from purchasing firearms in the United States. The Veterans’ Second Amendment Protection Act would require a judicial authority to determine that a VA beneficiary poses a danger to themselves or others before VA may send their names to be listed in the FBI’s NICS.

“Under current law, veterans who have come to VA for help but who are determined to be unable to manage their own financial affairs are labeled as mentally defective and, on that basis alone, are denied their 2nd amendment rights,” Burr said. “I am very concerned that government employees can so easily take away a veteran’s right to bear arms. My legislation would protect the rights of veterans and their families by ensuring that only a proper judicial authority is able to determine who is referred to NICS.”

The Federal Gun Control Act prohibits certain individuals who have been deemed a “mental defective” from purchasing a firearm. Over 116,000 people who receive VA benefits have been reported to NICS since 1999, stripping them of their constitutional rights simply because VA appointed a fiduciary to act on their behalf. A fiduciary is assigned to handle disability compensation, pensions, survivors’ compensation, and other VA payments on behalf of a veteran, surviving spouse, dependent child, or dependent parent. VA's review process for assigning a fiduciary is meant to determine one's ability to manage VA-provided cash assistance. The process does not determine whether they are a danger to themselves or others.

Sounds fine to me. I didn't think a senator in his right mind would be honestly trying to arm individuals with clearly diagnosed psychoses.

Heretic wrote:

From the press release found on the Senator's website:

Quote :

Today, U.S. Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), along with 14 other cosponsors, introduced legislation that would end an arbitrary process through which the government strips veterans and other Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) beneficiaries of their Second Amendment rights. Under current practice, veterans who have a fiduciary appointed to act on their behalf are deemed “mentally defective” and are reported to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a system which prevents individuals from purchasing firearms in the United States. The Veterans’ Second Amendment Protection Act would require a judicial authority to determine that a VA beneficiary poses a danger to themselves or others before VA may send their names to be listed in the FBI’s NICS.

“Under current law, veterans who have come to VA for help but who are determined to be unable to manage their own financial affairs are labeled as mentally defective and, on that basis alone, are denied their 2nd amendment rights,” Burr said. “I am very concerned that government employees can so easily take away a veteran’s right to bear arms. My legislation would protect the rights of veterans and their families by ensuring that only a proper judicial authority is able to determine who is referred to NICS.”

The Federal Gun Control Act prohibits certain individuals who have been deemed a “mental defective” from purchasing a firearm. Over 116,000 people who receive VA benefits have been reported to NICS since 1999, stripping them of their constitutional rights simply because VA appointed a fiduciary to act on their behalf. A fiduciary is assigned to handle disability compensation, pensions, survivors’ compensation, and other VA payments on behalf of a veteran, surviving spouse, dependent child, or dependent parent. VA's review process for assigning a fiduciary is meant to determine one's ability to manage VA-provided cash assistance. The process does not determine whether they are a danger to themselves or others.

Sounds fine to me. I didn't think a senator in his right mind would be honestly trying to arm individuals with clearly diagnosed psychoses.

Heretic,Do you really think that someone who can't manage their own financial affairs should be allowed to own a gun?

Artie60438 wrote:

Heretic,Do you really think that someone who can't manage their own financial affairs should be allowed to own a gun?

You're kidding, right?

In no way, shape, or form are an individual's financial problems an indicator of mental instability, especially in our current collapsing economy, let alone if your a disabled, out of work veteran. So... allowed to? Absolutely. I see no economic provisions listed anywhere in the second amendment. Is it the best use of their money? Probably not.

But regardless... your original thesis fails. Senator Burr does not want to arm those diagnosed with severe mental illness.

Heretic wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Heretic,Do you really think that someone who can't manage their own financial affairs should be allowed to own a gun?

You're kidding, right?

No,I'm talking about a situation where an actual guardian is appointed.

Besides, if you can't afford food or rent, why would you spend money on a gun (or liquor, or drugs, etc.)

Which makes the decision a financial one, albeit a poor one, and not one that endangers the public as claimed in the original article.