Gun grab being proposed for veterans.

[JD Barleycorn]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...=all#pagebreak

Led by democrats, the Senate is discussing whether or not veterans that have "mental or emotional" problems should have their second amendment rights voided. The current discussion is using bureacrats from the VA rather than mental health professional to do diagnosis duty. Sounds vaguely soviet. (Boris Badernov) We are not puting you in prison for a crime, we are putting you in a hospital because you are sick.

[i'va biggen]

Really, sounds like they are using mental health now and repubs want to use a Judge.

[JD Barleycorn]

Read it again. Anyone who has ever been under the microscope of a shrink during and after their military career could lose their rights because a bureacrat (not a doctor) finds a statement in their file (which could be from 20 years ago) and forwards it to the proper political authority. Where is the due process?

[i'va biggen]

If you are mentally unstable then you are ok with gun ownership?

[Seedy]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

If you are mentally unstable then you are ok with gun ownership?

And whats wrong with that? All those cocksuckers in DC are unstable, including the head cocksucker in chief in the White House

[CJ7]

seems like its a two part scenario

if something shows up in a vets records the medical community has no way of knowing .. enter the bureacrat JD mentions ... the bureacrat stimulates a medical exam, the DR then determines if the vet is fit to have any weapons .. some of those kids are really messed up, and totally depresed .. I for one have no problem keeping weapons away form military trained people with mental issues ..

[Jackie S]

I have no problem with keeping guns out of the hands of ANY mentally challenged person, whether they are a Veteran or not.

Of course, there is always that debate about who makes the decision as to whether someone is mentally unstable. That should be left up to a judge in a controled, legal hearing,

Denying someone a Right that is guaranteed by the Constitution should never be taken lightly.

[i'va biggen]

Having a judge make a decision if someone is mentally unstable is scary.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Having a judge make a decision if someone is mentally unstable is scary.

not if the judge bases his ruling on the professional opinion/s of medical professionals .. which will be the case

a medical opinion given by a judge wont hold water .. think about it

[i'va biggen]

See post #2

[CuteOldGuy]

Yeah, you'd like it to be like the old Soviet Union, wouldn't you? Dissenters were never imprisoned. They were simply declared "unstable" and sent to "mental hospitals."

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

I have no problem with keeping guns out of the hands of ANY mentally challenged person, whether they are a Veteran or not.

Of course, there is always that debate about who makes the decision as to whether someone is mentally unstable. That should be left up to a judge in a controled, legal hearing,

Denying someone a Right that is guaranteed by the Constitution should never be taken lightly.

I agree but if you read the article which JD tried to distort, you'd find that you could have your rights restored if you were able to prove that you were mentally stable by trained professionals. JD wants a judge to make that determination if I am reading his BS correctly, not the professionals.

Here is a question for JD, "Why would the DoD try and declare someone not competent to own a gun if they in fact were so? What is the up side to that? "

[JD Barleycorn]

I am surprised! Some good comments. Okay, let me ask this, why veterans? Wouldn't it make sense to include everyone? Maybe because veterans know how to effectively use weapons?

I never said that I wanted judges to make the determination. If they did this (and I don't think they should) I want a current doctor's opinion and not some note (which is the way I read it) in a file that could be from 20 years ago. Seeing the note of psychological observation may be enough for some bureaocrat to terminate your rights. The note is enough, not a current exam. Still...why are veterans the target?

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yeah, you'd like it to be like the old Soviet Union, wouldn't you? Dissenters were never imprisoned. They were simply declared "unstable" and sent to "mental hospitals."

If that reply was to me you missed the point again.you really are getting senile .

[i'va biggen]

I would say because vets are suffering more even than linebackers.Multiple missions haven't helped.