Defensive Carry banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
On Monday, Barack Obama’s Social Security Administration (SSA) issued the final version of a rule that will doom tens of thousands of law-abiding (and vulnerable) disability insurance and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients to a loss of Second Amendment rights under the guise of re-characterizing them as “mental defectives.” The SSA, for the first time in its history, will be coopted into the federal government’s gun control apparatus, effectively requiring Social Security applicants to weigh their need for benefits against their fundamental rights when applying for assistance based on mental health problems




https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-obama-ssa-finalizes-new-gun-prohibition-rule




Hopefully Trump can fix this!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
Fake news ?
Fake last eight years spent serving our country?

Also,
2NIAA, sec. 101(a)(4), 121 Stat. at 2161;Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Improving Availability of Relevant Executive Branch Records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, 78 FR 4297 (2013); Department of Justice, Guidance to Agencies Regarding Submission of Relevant Records to the NICS (March 2013) (‘‘DOJ Guidance’’). We included the relevant portion of the DOJ Guidance in the preamble to our proposed rules (81 FR at 27060—27061).
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 20 CFR Part 421 [Docket No. SSA—2016—0011] RIN 0960—AH95 Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 AGENCY: Social Security DATES: This final rule will be effective on January 18, 2017. However, compliance is not required until December 19, 2017.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Background On May 5, 2016, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (81 FR 27059) in which we proposed adding part 421 to our regulations in order to implement our obligations under the NIAA.

We adopt the proposed rules as final rules, with several changes outlined in the discussion of the public comments and our responses. The final rules allow a person to apply for relief any time after our adjudication that the person meets the requirements of the Federal mental health prohibitor has become final. The final rules also set out several circumstances in which we will notify the Attorney General to remove a person’s name from the NICS. We also made minor changes to the definition of the term ‘‘affected individual’’ in section 421.105 and to section 421.110(b)(2). The changes in both of these sections are for clarity, and do not substantively change the rules.

91702 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1As part of our responsibilities under the NIAA, we will also provide the Attorney General with copies of court orders that we receive, beginning on or after the compliance date of these final rules, regarding adult title II and title XVI disability claimants and beneficiaries who have been declared legally incompetent by a State or Federal court. The FBI will identify those court orders that meet the requirements of the Federal mental health prohibitor. fart, fart and fart some more.

I'm not a lawyer, I might be wrong, do to the dates highlighted and references per those dates I tend to believe there are some new additions by the outgoing administration here.

Although mental impairments are qualitatively different from impairments that affect physical body systems, such as the cardiovascular or musculoskeletal
body systems, mental impairments can and do prevent people from working. Our mental disorders listing criteria,which we recently updated effective
January 17, 2017
, accurately and reliably identify the mental impairments that prevent claimants from engaging in any gainful activity. Additionally,
section 221(h)(1) of the Act requires us to make reasonable efforts to ensure that a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist completes the medical review of cases
involving mental impairments before we make a determination on a claim for benefits. Fart

Grandma Got Run Over by Obama: SSA Finalizes New Gun Prohibition Rule FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2016 I also could be wrong but the NRA would not date this article inappropriately or serve to warn out of context.

Bottom line, this is the same, now bitter gubberment that cannot run the United States post office effectively. Wishes to restrict any American but moreover Vets from protecting themselves by means of their Second amendment rights.

I will do my best not return to this subject in this thread again but I do not think any changes will last a full year under the incomming POTUS.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,704 Posts
This is old news.
As in 1968 old.
Read the act and gain some understanding before using pseudo-news like this to advance your efforts at showing the world how horrible Obama is.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-19/pdf/2016-30407.pdf
You are referring to the GCA of 1968? I assume so. Senator Dodd (D) was responsible for that. The provisions of the Brady Bill were not incorporated into the GCA until 1993. The Permanent Brady Act was not added to the GCA until after the NICS system was implemented and became effective five years later, on 10/30/1998. Section 922(g) was added to 18 U.S.C. as well as 28 CFR Part 25 (National Instant Criminal Background Check System Regulations).

Section 922 (g) Unlawful Acts -

It shall be unlawful for any person-

(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution;

Very few actually know much about specific records NICS has in its databases. Mental health records and privacy has always been a concern. Due process is a Constitutional right that gun advocates question as this is the first time SSA is being required to report mental conditions of any disability recipients.

While adjudicated mentally defective persons in most cases should not possess any weapons IMO, the timing of this new regulation is questionable.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,094 Posts
You can bet PTSD will be conveniently added to the list of mental defects, if it hasn't all ready.IE; look at what the VA has done under this administration. I think they intentionally assign improper diagnosis to meet their political agenda. How many vets go along with it in order to get disability checks not fully understanding the repercussions? I know of one vet, had zero time in a combat zone. He is receiving a check for a few things including PTSD. I asked him what did the PTSD stem from...he says from a CWO yelling at him! I kid you not...stupid on many levels. But I blame the VA for that and the idiot for claiming it. They have got to reform the whole system there imho...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,704 Posts
You can bet PTSD will be conveniently added to the list of mental defects, if it hasn't all ready.IE; look at what the VA has done under this administration. I think they intentionally assign improper diagnosis to meet their political agenda. How many vets go along with it in order to get disability checks not fully understanding the repercussions? I know of one vet, had zero time in a combat zone. He is receiving a check for a few things including PTSD. I asked him what did the PTSD stem from...he says from a CWO yelling at him! I kid you not...stupid on many levels. But I blame the VA for that and the idiot for claiming it. They have got to reform the whole system there imho...
I completely agree that far too may people are on government disability and assistance programs be it VA or SSA that should not be. When I see what appears to be totally fit and capable persons collecting 100% disability checks and then see them climbing trees, water skiing in sunny retirement or working construction as a second career, the government checks should be cut off.

One can only hope that "draining the swamp" will include better oversight of this type of abuse. Die hard gun rights advocates will and should question a persons right to due process if a Federal agency such as SSA is erroneously reporting false medical records to NICS. Law abiding persons have 2A rights, but those that are mentally defective or who have made false claims to receive government disability money at other tax payers expense, IMO have chosen to give up their rights, knowingly or not.

I don't see anything in the law that would preclude a person receiving disability to stop taking benefits if they want to keep their 2A right. Others with legitimate disabilities other than adjudicated mental disorders should not and probably will not lose their 2A right to bear arms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
I completely agree that far too may people are on government disability and assistance programs be it VA or SSA that should not be. When I see what appears to be totally fit and capable persons collecting 100% disability checks and then see them climbing trees, water skiing in sunny retirement or working construction as a second career, the government checks should be cut off.

One can only hope that "draining the swamp" will include better oversight of this type of abuse. Die hard gun rights advocates will and should question a persons right to due process if a Federal agency such as SSA is erroneously reporting false medical records to NICS. Law abiding persons have 2A rights, but those that are mentally defective or who have made false claims to receive government disability money at other tax payers expense, IMO have chosen to give up their rights, knowingly or not.

I don't see anything in the law that would preclude a person receiving disability to stop taking benefits if they want to keep their 2A right. Others with legitimate disabilities other than adjudicated mental disorders should not and probably will not lose their 2A right to bear arms.
When you see those people committing that crime, you should be reporting them so they can be disqualified from receiving the assistance.

Unfortunately, it seems "the swamp" is being drained into DC: Donald Trump keeps DC swampy - CNNPolitics.com

Thanks for the reply, but why then does the NRA seem to betray this as something new?
Because it supports their agenda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
This really $%##*& me off.... I have been in constant severe pain for the last 36 years of my life and still worked until 5 years ago when my pain level went through the roof. I applied for SSDI for the pain, anxiety, depression that comes with it. Does this mean that some jerkoff is going to say that I am too mental to have a firearm? I have had them all my life and never had an issue, what would they say changed that would disqualify me?

The new administration better take care of this....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
I completely agree that far too may people are on government disability and assistance programs be it VA or SSA that should not be. When I see what appears to be totally fit and capable persons collecting 100% disability checks and then see them climbing trees, water skiing in sunny retirement or working construction as a second career, the government checks should be cut off.

One can only hope that "draining the swamp" will include better oversight of this type of abuse. Die hard gun rights advocates will and should question a persons right to due process if a Federal agency such as SSA is erroneously reporting false medical records to NICS. Law abiding persons have 2A rights, but those that are mentally defective or who have made false claims to receive government disability money at other tax payers expense, IMO have chosen to give up their rights, knowingly or not Others with legitimate disabilities other than adjudicated mental disorders should not and probably will not lose their 2A right to bear arms.
Ii comletely agree with using the system for false claims. This is a huge can of worms as I see it. JMHO. Devils advocate if you will allow me.
Is it really fair to lump these two together?
How would you feel if you were told you probably would not loose your 2A rights as a law abiding citizen?
Who would you say is qualified to make the determination of disqualification of 2A rights due to mental illness?
How does a person know if they made the list of 2Arights stripped due to mental illness?
How and who pays for the appeals process if a person is ruled mental but is not?
Some people would say I am mental......is that next? " Law Enforcement officer walks up to your car window in California. You are from Missouri. He motions for you to roll down your window and says, "Um sir, you just honked at a person sitting at a red light as if it were green. Can I see your I.D., oh you have a conceal carry permit? I will see you before the judge next Tuesday as I will bear witness that you indeed have a mental disorder and should lose your gun rights." There is no end to this lunacy.


Unfortunately, it seems "the swamp" is being drained into DC: Donald Trump keeps DC swampy - CNNPolitics.com Because it supports their agenda.
Perhaps you should try watching anything other than the Clinton News Network. Hope you do not cross paths with chicken little.......The sky is falling. The sky....... :gah::rofl:
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhaedrusIV

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Well, the NRA and others are passing on inaccurate information and engaging in fear mongering.

So, lets see if we can get the facts and actually understand what the SSA is doing.

For the sake of argument lets focus on the three (3) basic types of SS Benefits.

1) Retirement Benefits. When you reach a certain age a Person can apply for SS Retirement Benefits, based on the years worked and the amount payed, the applicant will receive a monthly benefit payment. This Retirement Benefit has absolutely NOTHING to do with this SSA directive and nothing to do with firearms and the RTKBA, nothing.

2) Disability Benefits based on Physical defect. To qualify for these benefits the individual must "apply" for disability benefits, must "qualify" for disability benefits under certain Criteria and must provide "proof" and documentation that the applicant is physically disabled, cannot work, is not working and will never work. This proof is usually employment records, Medical Records and Doctors recommendations. This type of SS Benefit has nothing to do with this SSA directive and has nothing to do with Firearms and being reported to the NICS system, nothing.

3) Disability due to Mental Defect. To qualify for SSI due to Mental Defect, the applicant must prove to the SSA that they are Mentally Defective. The SSA does NOT determine if one is Mentally Defective, the applicant must supply court documents, medical record, or documentation from a "Lawful Authority".

To collect SSI based on Mental defect the applicant has already been adjudicated Mental Defective by a Court, a Doctor, or other lawful authority.

Those that apply for and are granted SSI Disability are already "Prohibited Persons" under the GCA 1968 whether they apply for benefits or not.

The only thing the SA is doing is reporting (Federal Law) to the NICS those that have "ADMITTED" and proved to the SSA that they are bat-**** crazy and are, by their own admission and their own documents "Prohibited persons".

This SSA directive has NOTHING to do with age. It only deals with Mental Defect and that can come at any age.

Like it or not the law was written back in 1968 and it is called the Gun Control Act or 1968.

The law clearly states that anyone that has been adjudicated Mentally Defective by a court a doctor or other legal authority is a "Prohibited Person" and cannot possess a firearm or Ammunition.

If a person on SSI Disability due to Mental Defect, answered (NO) in line 11(F) of the NICS form 4473, they would be committing a Felony.

The law was passed back in 1968, all the SSA is doing is following existing law and reporting "Prohibited Persons" to the NICS.

OH, and for those that live with or have contact with a "Prohibited Person" due to Mental Defect, you to could be facing Felony charges for Aiding and Abetting if you do not physically deny the "Prohibited Person" access to Your firearms or ammunition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,687 Posts
If someone is receiving treatment for a mental disorder, that is exactly the person that should not have access to firearms. That goes the same for extreme PTSD. Is it somehow better if a vet is the one who snaps? Remember Chris Kyle?
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top