It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Senate Passes Veterans Disarmament Bill

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Gun Owners Group Condemns "Treacherous" Passage Of Anti-Second Amendment Legislation
" Veterans bill" passed by House and Senate without recorded vote


Steve Watson
infowars.net...
Friday, Dec 21, 2007

Gun owners and second amendment rights groups have condemned the passage by Congress yesterday of legislation that re-writes the law in order to regulate gun ownership.

Opponents have dubbed the bill, the "veterans disarmament act" as it will place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the federal gun ban list.

The bill, HR 2640, passed in the House in June and was later passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee both times without a recorded vote. Gun owners have been trying to raise awareness and beat down the legislation ever since.

The bill, sponsored by outspoken anti-second amendment representatives Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), also applies to anyone who has been diagnosed with ADHD as a child and to anyone who develops Alzheimer's. Gun owners fear that in time the diagnosis of any kind of mental affliction could end with rights being stripped.

Section 102((1)©(iv) in HR 2640 provides for dumping raw medical records into the system which will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.

The bill radically redefines key legal terms to allow gun ownership rights to be stripped on the findings of a psychiatric diagnosis, where in the past gun rights could only be withdrawn through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court with the protections of due process.

"This really opens a door for the ATF, to come smashing the door down actually in your home because lets say you owned guns prior to someone saying you have a mental health issue, well that means you can't keep the guns you have. So this will give a whole new emphasis to ATF to justify their budget and their thuggery." Zelman stressed during yesterday's interview.






So...OK...what does this mean? Is that the sound of goose-stepping jack-boots marching down the street?




posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 09:03 PM
link   
This is not cool.. Sooo what happens when you get misdiagnosed?

Ive seen that diagnoses slung around just for having normal hyper kids. Hell half the kids from the 90's were prolly diagnosed and treated for ADHD.

Thats almost half of the population of the younger generation that will have no second amendment rights!

And im not even going to start on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)....

Please vote Ron Paul people.



posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   
What a thankless goverment. I can't imagine that they would stop at just banning new gun sales to these PTSD vets. I expect that it would be more invasive than that. I'm thinking that when things start to go down, they don't want those with military or battle experience being armed.



posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Huh.. I thought John McCain had PTSD.

So that means they are saying that he is ok to be a president but not to own a gun.


Want to see something funny? Link
The military wont even recognize PTSD!

[edit on 21-12-2007 by Digital_Reality]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Any word on when this will get to the Presidents desk?
I hope he veto's this bill.

[edit on 22-12-2007 by Digital_Reality]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 08:31 AM
link   
oh, goody, more business for the illegal gun market!!!
there's nothing like turning you average law abiding citizen into a criminal, and this is one good example of our gov't doing this. I'd venture to say that if our vets, with all their training in gun care and safety, ect....aren't worthy to own a gun, then well, can't imagine many that would be!!
I do have just one question though, does this bill ban your average everyday hunting rifle, because technically, according to the UN they can't do that. If you use your gun to help feed your face, the government can't take it from you....according to the UN that is. I can understand banning some of the weapons that are being sold, they would tear a deer to bits so badly it would be unusable for food I think. But that's where I would draw the line, they shouldn't be allowed to take the average joe's way of obtaining food on his own if he wishes to. if someone decided that he would rather feed himself by growing his own veggies and hunting for his meat instead of eating all that contaminated crap his ability to do so shouldn't be taken from him. Since that embeds him more into the economic trap that we've built.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Link


H.R. 2640, the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act"

The NICS Improvement Amendments Act (H.R. 2640) would require federal agencies to provide relevant records for use in NICS. It would also provide financial incentives to states to do the same, by rewarding states that provide records to NICS and penalizing those that refuse to do so over an extended period of time.

Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would “prohibit” thousands of people from owning guns. This is not true; these bills would only enforce current prohibitions. In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to have their names removed from the instant check system.

The following are the key provisions of H.R. 2640, introduced by Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), which passed the House of Representatives by a voice vote on June 13, 2007.

Key Provisions of H.R. 2640

H.R. 2640 would prevent use of federal “adjudications” that consist only of medical diagnoses without findings that the people involved are dangerous or mentally incompetent. This would ensure that purely medical records are never used in NICS. Gun ownership rights would only be lost as a result of a finding that the person is a danger to himself or others, or lacks the capacity to manage his own affairs.
H.R. 2640 would require all federal agencies that impose mental health adjudications or commitments (such as the VA) to provide a process for “relief from disabilities.” The bill allows de novo judicial review when an agency denies relief—that is, the court would look at the application on its merits, rather than deferring to the agency’s earlier decision.
As a practical matter, the mental health disability is the only firearm disqualifier that can never be removed. Criminal records can be expunged or pardoned, but mental records cannot.
While BATFE used to have the ability to accept applications to remove individuals’ prohibited status, appropriations riders every year since 1992 have barred it from doing so. Allowing this process through H.R. 2640 would be an improvement over the current law.
Under H.R. 2640, even if a person is inappropriately committed or declared incompetent by a federal agency, the person would have an opportunity to correct the error—either through the agency or in court.
H.R. 2640 would prevent reporting of mental adjudications or commitments by federal agencies when those adjudications or commitments have been removed.
H.R. 2640 would also make clear that if a federal adjudication or commitment has expired or been removed, it would no longer bar a person from possessing or receiving firearms under the Gun Control Act.
This actually restores the person’s rights, as well as deleting the record from NICS—a significant improvement over current law.
States that receive funding would also need to have a relief from disabilities program for mental adjudications and commitments. State relief programs would have to provide for de novo judicial review, as in the federal programs.
Relief granted by a state program would remove the federal prohibition on the person possessing or receiving a firearm under the Gun Control Act—again, an improvement over current law.
Many states have processes for temporary emergency commitments that allow a short-term commitment based only on affidavits from police, doctors or family members, without opportunity for a hearing. Because federal law prohibits gun possession by a person who “has been” committed, a person committed under such a process can’t possess a gun even after full release from the temporary order. By requiring participating states to have a relief program that actually removes the disability, H.R. 2640 would be a significant improvement over current law.
The legislation would improve the accuracy and completeness of NICS by requiring federal agencies and participating states to provide relevant records. For instance, it would give states an incentive to report people such as Virginia Tech murderer Seung-Hui Cho—that is, people who were found after a full court hearing to be a danger to themselves or others, but not reported to NICS due to lack of funding or contrary state laws.
The legislation requires removal of expired, incorrect or otherwise irrelevant records. Today, totally innocent people (e.g., individuals with arrest records, who were never convicted of the crime charged) are sometimes subject to delayed or denied firearm purchases because of incomplete records in the system.
The legislation prohibits federal fees for NICS checks. Under current law, only annual appropriations riders prohibit the FBI from trying to impose fees by regulation (as the Clinton Administration proposed in 1998). A permanent ban on such a “gun tax” has been an NRA priority for nearly a decade.
The legislation requires an audit by the Government Accountability Office of funds already spent for criminal history improvements. There has only been limited documentation of how hundreds of millions of dollars intended for NICS were spent on non-NICS programs such as automated fingerprint systems.
Voluntary Psychological Treatment

Neither current federal law, nor H.R. 2640, would prohibit gun possession by people who have voluntarily sought psychological counseling or checked themselves into a hospital:

Current law only prohibits gun possession by people who have been “adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to any mental institution.” Current BATFE regulations specifically exclude commitments for observation and voluntary commitments. Records of voluntary treatment also would not be available under federal and state health privacy laws.
Similarly, voluntary drug or alcohol treatment would not be reported to NICS. First, voluntary treatment is not a “commitment.” Second, current federal law on gun possession by drug users, as applied in BATFE regulations, only prohibits gun ownership by those whose “unlawful [drug] use has occurred recently enough to indicate that the individual is actively engaged in such conduct.”
In short, neither current law nor this legislation would affect those who voluntarily get psychological help. No person who needs help for a mental health or substance abuse problem should be deterred from seeking that help due to fear of losing Second Amendment rights.





posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
This is disturbing for a few reasons. Firstly anyone who is NOT effected by experiencing war needs to be treated. PTSD is such a broad term. It is also a good way to track Veterans, who may or may be unhappy with the government.
Secondly, I find it interesting that Veterans, who are not only trained to use guns but have experience using them, are to be denied.


[edit on 22-12-2007 by deessell]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Here is a site to track the status of the bill.
Even if he doesn't sign it, as long as he doesn't veto, it will pass.

Link

[edit on 22-12-2007 by Digital_Reality]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I think Digital Reality hit the nail on the head about ADHD. This bill is less about disarming those with PTSD and so much more about disarming the younger generation. There is an epidemic of ADHD being diagnosed against kids that display normal child like behaviour. Remember when we were kids? When I was in middle school and high school I thought that half the kids in my class should be locked in cages like monkeys. Nowadays they slap an ADHD label on them and send them home with pills that turn them into Psycho paths (Columbine, Omaha, V-tech, etc etc).

The media and public schools have been brain washing the USA against gun ownership for 30+ years. Now we have a population where only like 1 in 20 people own guns, most of them are over 40, the youngest generation on the whole is against gun ownership while at the same time being de-sensitized to violence and aggression. On top of most of the younglings not wanting to own guns anyway the Fedgov has been diagnosing children with an imaginary disease in wholesale numbers for 10+ years only now to turn around and say that everyone ever diagnosed with ADHD (even if they were 7 or 8 yrs old at the time) can not legally own a firearm.

This is a well thought out part of "Their" plan. People go to the Doctor now for everything. The doctors are trained to medicate, the people are trained to be medicated.

Overmedicate, overstimulate, manipulate, and disarm. We are slaves.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   
This may be a minor point, but in some states, there are already laws about people with history of mental illness..........not being allowed to buy/own weapons.

Now I want all of you to think about this in a logical, non-conspericy way.

Do you think someone with post tramtic stress syndrome should be having guns around them????

If they flip and have a flashback, having a weapon can be dangerous to them and those around them.

Just my 2 cents.

BTW, the government can have my weapons when they pry them from my cold dead hands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   
ya, but you need a few things to create a slave.... you have to have so much force behind you that they know that where ever they go, there will be someone there ready and willing to enforce the slavery, and they need to be so dependant on you that they think that they won't live without you. thus, you pluck the african native off the continent of africa and ship them all the way to a new world, a unfamiliar world, and you displace the native americans onto barren lands...

what can I say, sometimes it doesn't work, the native americans weren't as fearfull of death, they sat on their barren lands and refused to become slaves...

their genetically modified seeds that produce barren fruit, along with moves to take guns (although as far as I know, there hasn't been any regulation against you typical hunting rifle)...would make many of the few left that are trying to be as independent as possible more apt to be dependent. It's hard to make a slave out of someone who can say heck with you and go off to one of the natural parks and knows how to live outside of society...although, I think in the case of the US, they wouldn't have to leave society, since there'd be whole segments of society living together, refusing to give an inch when it came to their freedom....


[edit on 22-12-2007 by dawnstar]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   
What is Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome ?? Its a word or some doctors opinion.
Hell you can be diagnosed with PTSS from a car accident.
Its a form of stress!

Everybody on this planet is guilty of being stressed in some way or another.

Link
[ex
Risk Factors

Risk factors for PTSD include previous trauma; a predisposing mental health condition; the type and severity of the traumatic event; and lack of adequate and competent support for the person after the trauma. However, PTSD can develop in people who do not possess any of these risk factors.



Natural disasters (e.g., fire, tornado, earthquake) ??
Look out hurricane Katrina victims! If you were stressed out by the disaster you could have PTSS and lose your second amendment rights.

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 1/5/08 by FredT]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
There is a Vietnam vet that does all the gun smithing for my local gun shop. This man is perfectly fine mentally. He makes a living repairing firearms and has for 20+ years.

He could quite possibly lose his second amendment rights and be out of work. No longer able to make a living or put food on his table. Where will this man turn at his age to make ends meet?

The above is just one example of how such a broad law on firearms will affect Innocent people.

What about 911 firefighters?

[edit on 22-12-2007 by Digital_Reality]



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by tiredofthecrap
 


Federal Law Bans Doctors from opening files or Records on Vetrens, records dumped in system for public law enforcement review NEED Government Court Order, ITS on per CASE REVIEW. ITS THE LAW



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Digital_Reality
 


THIS TERM was developed because someone had a bad year and went postal, killed several people, He needed a good Defence Sooo!!!



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by deessell
 


For The RECORD, since 1918 thourgh now more than 500 thousand plus Combat serviceman and woman have killed, have body counts per mission, come home to be good parents and friends the government [the Company Commanders send those with a Big Question Mark on their BEHAVIOR patterns to the DOCTORS to be SCREENed before Discharge]. Every now and than when your back home trying to get back a normal life THINGS happens when you DEAL WITH BIG A*****'s at home and Work. This is a record FACT. Peace



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
PTSD = A monthly disability check and other goodies that come with the title.

Addhd and other so called conditions = sometims equal a payment from our government.

Could this new proposed gun law be a tool we so desperatly need to get lazy people from claiming illnesses and conditions they do not have. The way to aquire a disability check now is by having a mental disorder. It's commonly called getting a " crazy check". Many people have come out of the military service and looked for the easiest way to make a living without working. Shame on them.

My dad was a decorated WW2 veteran and when the war was over he rejoind society and worked his arse off to make something of himself.

My SO was also a decorated Viet Nam veteran. After the war he worked his arse off to make a living.

If your mind is so messed up that you are getting governmemt benefits for your mental condition or you were fed pills for years growing up I darn sure do not want a gun in your hands.

I'm not saying all people who claim PTSD are receiving a disability check but I would bet over half are.

I am a paid in full lifetime NRA member so you know I believe we have too many gun laws as it is. But keep the guns out of the hands of nut cases. They give us responsible gun owners a bad rep.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Dizziedame,
You bring a good point. Some people do claim PTSD for a monthly disability check but I wouldn't go around throwing that up in the air.

PTSD is more than likely to go untreated than someone claiming it for a monthly check in most cases.

Bone13,
PTSD is an issue. It's not just some defence for people who decide to step out of the lines.


I was going to leave this topic be but due to the replies it has had im going to have to write my 2 cents.

PTSD like any other mental illness is going to be thrown around and miss used. Some people are going to claim it who can really get by in everyday life just for a little extra cash. Some people are going to claim that it is really nothing. Some people are going to go through everyday life that may need help but aren't going to get it.

Along with the disability check and other goodies there are a few things that are not some positive with being labled having PTSD. Have a stressful job? People who have been labled as having PTSD don't, it gose down in their record and they are not likely to be police men or preform other jobs that my have stressful days.

Now on to the darker side of this post. Should people who have PTSD be able to own a firearm? Now im not an expert on the matter but I have been in some combat. It takes some people longer to adjust back to being in the American society than it dose others. When soldiers are training a lot of the time the train is repatative to train then to react the right way in combat. Selector switch Safe, selector switch simi, selector switch safe.

In most situations life in American society is not going to reflect a soldiers life in combat so most soldiers are going to be able to adapt quite well. However, soldiers with PTSD could get into a situation and react differently than someone who has not been in combat.

With that being said we all know the effectivness of this really isn't going to change much. If someone wants drugs there going to find them; and if a man or woman wants to get their hands on a weapon they are going to get it. Legal or not it's going to happen.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 12:56 PM
link   
There is no such thing as a Veteran's Disarmament Bill.

www.vawatchdog.org...

www.nraila.org...

capwiz.com...

capwiz.com...

www.nraila.org...

This is base alarmism.

The bill is designed to help prevent those who have mental illnesses from buying firearms.

A diagnosis is not sufficient to keep anyone from exercising his Second Amendment rights.

One must be adjudicated as mentally defective for this bill to apply.

The NRA supports this bill.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join