testtest

Veterans' 2nd Amendment Protection Act

shanneba

shanneba

Professional
Your member of Congress needs to hear from you!

Please call your U.S. Representative today and urge them to vote YES on H.R. 1041, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act! Please tell them to vote YES on the rule and vote YES on the final passage of the bill. If you don’t know the number for your U.S. Representative, you can reach them at (202) 224-3121.

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote this week on the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. This bill (H.R. 1041) would reverse the unconstitutional and deeply troubling policy that stripped veterans of their right to keep and bear arms without due process, simply because they have been assigned a fiduciary to help manage their Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits that they’ve earned through their service to our Nation.

This legislation, sponsored by Chairman Mike Bost (R-IL-12), would allow veterans to receive the benefits and assistance to which they are entitled by their selfless service to our country without the fear of losing their fundamental freedoms of purchasing and possessing firearms.

www.nraila.org

NRA-ILA | UPDATE: Legislation Introduced to Protect Veterans’ Second Amendment Rights

The Chairmen of the House and Senate Committees on Veterans’ Affairs, U.S. Representative Mike Bost (R-IL-12) and Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS), as well as Senator John Kennedy (R-LA), have reintroduced the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act (H.R. 1041/S. 478).
www.nraila.org www.nraila.org

You can also find your house member at Congress.gov and most have a contact link to send them email/contact form-

About halfway down the congress.gov page:

1779128164404.png








Full text of the bill H.R. 1041

 
PieterCoetzee said:
Im must not be understanding, How does being assigned help from the VA negate firearms ownership, more importantly there is nothing on a 4473 that askes if you have been assigned a fiduciary, so how would it come up?
Click to expand...
Problem is that the V.A.feels that if you can not handle your finances, you are probably not safe with a firearm, because of memory issues. To a certain extent they may be correct, but to target every vet whose wife handles the $$$, as mine does, is a slap in the face to us!
 
3L120 said:
Problem is that the V.A.feels that if you can not handle your finances, you are probably not safe with a firearm,
Click to expand...
Maybe they do (IDK); but thinking that and declaring you mentally incompetent is far from the same. Is the VA providing a doctors statement to that fact, Im betting not.

Im not disagreeing with the bill, I just dont understand the need. A far better thing might be to tell the VA docs to stop issuing scripts of marijuana
 
PieterCoetzee said:
Im must not be understanding, How does being assigned help from the VA negate firearms ownership, more importantly there is nothing on a 4473 that askes if you have been assigned a fiduciary, so how would it come up?
Click to expand...

The 4473 question that might apply is
"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally ill"

Prior to 1998, (Clinton's term) that normally required an order from a court or mental health professonal.

How the law reads regarding that question on the 4473-

"Adjudicated as a mental defective" (the phrasing used on ATF Form 4473, Question 21.g / formerly similar numbering) is a specific federal legal term under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4)). It triggers a prohibition on possessing, receiving, shipping, or transporting firearms or ammunition.

(source atf.gov) https://www.atf.gov/media/25291/download

It does not mean simply having a mental health diagnosis, seeking voluntary treatment, being prescribed medication, or a temporary hold for observation. It requires a formal determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.

Examples that typically do not trigger it: Voluntary counseling/therapy, short observational holds without formal adjudication/commitment, or isolated financial benefit management issues (though some VA fiduciary appointments have historically been interpreted broadly, with ongoing clarification efforts).

source https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...fective-and-committed-to-a-mental-institution

...

In the administration of these benefits, VA officials, most without any special mental health training or judicial authority, may make a determination of “incompetence” for the purposes of evaluating a veteran’s “capacity to contract or to manage his or her own affairs, including disbursement of funds.” This alone is an understandable measure to ensure that if veterans need help managing finances, the VA benefits would go to someone who can provide that help, usually someone within the beneficiary’s own family or household chosen by the veterans themselves. Notably, this determination does not require any finding that a beneficiary is dangerous to self or others, mentally ill, suicidal, etc.

Nevertheless, since 1998, VA has been using this process to report hundreds of thousands of veterans who have been assigned these fiduciaries to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as “mental defectives,” thereby ending their legal right to possess a firearm.

Last year, NRA-ILA secured a provision in the FY2024 appropriations process that defunded VA’s ability to submit the names of veterans with fiduciaries to NICS without a determination by a judicial authority deeming that a veteran is a danger to him or herself, or others.
 
What scares me in this bill is how easy it would be to ADD another class of people to be included in the parameters of the description. Several years ago under the Obama era, DHS Secretary Napolitano said that police retirees should be included in the domestic terrorist class because of our training etc.

Just my ramblings and concerns about this type of legislation. Your thoughts may be different.
 
shanneba said:
The 4473 question that might apply is
"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally ill"

Prior to 1998, (Clinton's term) that normally required an order from a court or mental health professonal.

How the law reads regarding that question on the 4473-

"Adjudicated as a mental defective" (the phrasing used on ATF Form 4473, Question 21.g / formerly similar numbering) is a specific federal legal term under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4)). It triggers a prohibition on possessing, receiving, shipping, or transporting firearms or ammunition.

(source atf.gov) https://www.atf.gov/media/25291/download

It does not mean simply having a mental health diagnosis, seeking voluntary treatment, being prescribed medication, or a temporary hold for observation. It requires a formal determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.

Examples that typically do not trigger it: Voluntary counseling/therapy, short observational holds without formal adjudication/commitment, or isolated financial benefit management issues (though some VA fiduciary appointments have historically been interpreted broadly, with ongoing clarification efforts).

source https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...fective-and-committed-to-a-mental-institution

...

In the administration of these benefits, VA officials, most without any special mental health training or judicial authority, may make a determination of “incompetence” for the purposes of evaluating a veteran’s “capacity to contract or to manage his or her own affairs, including disbursement of funds.” This alone is an understandable measure to ensure that if veterans need help managing finances, the VA benefits would go to someone who can provide that help, usually someone within the beneficiary’s own family or household chosen by the veterans themselves. Notably, this determination does not require any finding that a beneficiary is dangerous to self or others, mentally ill, suicidal, etc.

Nevertheless, since 1998, VA has been using this process to report hundreds of thousands of veterans who have been assigned these fiduciaries to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as “mental defectives,” thereby ending their legal right to possess a firearm.

Last year, NRA-ILA secured a provision in the FY2024 appropriations process that defunded VA’s ability to submit the names of veterans with fiduciaries to NICS without a determination by a judicial authority deeming that a veteran is a danger to him or herself, or others.
Click to expand...
yes
but just because the va may put some statement in a file,
does not make it a prohibition to owning firearms, actually it takes a court order to release any VA files to any person place or government.
VA is prohibited from calling up atf or fbi, local LEO etc unless you are an immediate threat as it is, at that point you aint leaving the facility .
but they had better have the ducks all in a row and quacking correctly as the doc can find them selves in a **** storm of legal issues

i am sure there are veterans as well as lots of other people that might not need to own firearms... we are a society of free will. but DUE PROCESS is due process.

i dont want to go down the political rabbit hole
so
without due process the va determination has zero weight
same with Social security dis ability, they go by their own rules and can make all the statements they want,
but without legal process its moot
however, people cant afford to fight the man as it is and give up
but atf has to provide a written reason for denial.
if this law actually FORCES the Va or SS to follow law and give due process then its worth while

BUT<<<<<,,,,,,,, DOD is also supposed to follow the law and report persons convicted of domestic violence and release from service.. often it never happens

sorry its monday and i am onry today for some reason
 
powerboatr said:
yes
but just because the va may put some statement in a file,
does not make it a prohibition to owning firearms, actually it takes a court order to release any VA files to any person place or government.
VA is prohibited from calling up atf or fbi, local LEO etc unless you are an immediate threat as it is, at that point you aint leaving the facility .
but they had better have the ducks all in a row and quacking correctly as the doc can find them selves in a **** storm of legal issues

i am sure there are veterans as well as lots of other people that might not need to own firearms... we are a society of free will. but DUE PROCESS is due process.

i dont want to go down the political rabbit hole
so
without due process the va determination has zero weight
same with Social security dis ability, they go by their own rules and can make all the statements they want,
but without legal process its moot
however, people cant afford to fight the man as it is and give up
but atf has to provide a written reason for denial.
if this law actually FORCES the Va or SS to follow law and give due process then its worth while

BUT<<<<<,,,,,,,, DOD is also supposed to follow the law and report persons convicted of domestic violence and release from service.. often it never happens

sorry its monday and i am onry today for some reason
Click to expand...
If you look at the link I posted to the Federal Register in my post it has a great explanation of how it was implemented in 1996/1997 and what is being proposed to correct the AFT "rulings" from 1997.

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.federalregister.gov www.federalregister.gov
 
let me nice now
YES we need to absolutely reign in overzealous government agencies that like or think they control our freedoms
i hope it passes along with a few others
i just get pissssed as hades when due process is fluckered up and we or other get skewered
i very much appreciate you bring this up to get more folks to call, etc
BZ
 
The 4473 only asks the question. There is NO check beyond the NCIC check, so unless the VA has a doctor who declared the patient psychologically diminished, Im not seeing an issue. The NCIS check doesnt include VA records

I come at this with some background in mental health and also having been married to a Psych doctor. First I will say that MOST of the persons in the mental health field are far FAR left and hugely anti gun but I will also say that it would take more than a "he cant pay his bills" to sign an psych eval.
 
PieterCoetzee said:
The 4473 only asks the question. There is NO check beyond the NCIC check, so unless the VA has a doctor who declared the patient psychologically diminished, Im not seeing an issue. The NCIS check doesnt include VA records

I come at this with some background in mental health and also having been married to a Psych doctor. First I will say that MOST of the persons in the mental health field are far FAR left and hugely anti gun but I will also say that it would take more than a "he cant pay his bills" to sign an psych eval.
Click to expand...
1779143399301.jpeg
 
PieterCoetzee said:
Maybe they do (IDK); but thinking that and declaring you mentally incompetent is far from the same. Is the VA providing a doctors statement to that fact, Im betting not.

Im not disagreeing with the bill, I just dont understand the need. A far better thing might be to tell the VA docs to stop issuing scripts of marijuana
Click to expand...

The whole fear of MJ and guns is overblown. There is much much more issue with misuse of prescription narcotics that big Pharma has Drs push.

That said does this bill address the issue of certain TBI/PTSD being automatically stripped of their 2A rights without due process?

That is an issue with a lot of folks. They are not a danger but because they are awarded a % of VA monthly payment they automatically get denied when trying to buy a firearm instead of a case by case basis
 
PieterCoetzee said:
Yes but Red Flag petitions show on a NICS check
Click to expand...
I was speaking about "due process". Where is the due process when you are flagged for an allegation?
As for Vets. I've been warning about PTSD disabilities for years. Nothing is free, and don't think for one minute that went it comes time to disarm you they will give a flying rats tail about right and wrong. Any old excuse will do. This does not mean don't seek help just be careful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top