This is blatantly unconstitutional,so where´s all the lawsuits. You can´t take away a person´s right because they served in the military.
No where in the left´s quests for gungrabbing do they mention crime and criminals,only the rare occurrence where a legal gun falls in the wrong hands.There´s been no demand that criminal register their guns because they´re part of Obama´s army.

"You have to give us your guns."

"Ah beg t´ diffa, suh."

My cousin went to the VA hospital in Dallas a couple of weeks ago on a routine visit, definately not psych related, and he was asked if he has a weapon at home. This is getting scary!

They are preparing for war. There´s no way they can be buying up enough ammo to kill every American five times while they are rapidly closing in on disarming the populace so they can install an endless tyranny, that they are not preparing for war. The unarmed marines at embassies, the bolt-less rifles in the inaugural parade,the VA disarming vets, the unavailability of ammo. Folks! They´re serious and they know they have only four years to get it done.

The VFW & like private agencies should pool their money together and file a federal lawsuit.

Should be a must read.

Obama doesn´t want to leave guns in the hands of those most capable of using them - and who have the most reason to distrust and fear him.

Ultimately, the second Amendment is the Guarantee for all other Amendments.

Obama isn´t running again, but still dreams of being President after 2016.

The IBD carefully edited the letter to make their point. The full letter is talking about those who are declared incompetent - for example, must have a legal guardian designated. If you have a legal guardian, then you cannot legally contract, so you cannot legally contract to purchase a gun.

Nothing in the letter is attempting to disarm able-bodied veterans. The issue is with those who have brain injuries to the extent that they can no longer make decisions for themselves.

The little bunny has drunk his / her kool aid once again. The letter mentions "Right wing extremists".....Well, bunny, what about LEFT wing extremists?
Any person with a brain can easily see the ploy is definitely the work of those who want our Constitution to be gone!

I beg to differ #8. It´s called chipping away at your freedoms one at a time. You think its rational, so the freedom gets lost. Then they come up with another chip, and another chip. Before you know it, your freedoms are all gone.

Hey Bugs, you miss the point. Declaring someone incompetent without due process is unconstitutional. And where due process is breached is in presuming guilt and putting the burden of proof on the veteran. It says "guilty until proven innocent".
Do you support Miranda rights for a cop killer, but no due process for a veteran?
I say you do.

# 10. Im afraid you are right

fta: "No one wants the mentally unstable to possess firearms"

New administration policy (coming as soon as they think up some way to rationalize it): Those who own guns are mentally unstable and therefore should have their guns taken away from them.

Ehhhh, what´s up Spambot?

This is blatantly unconstitutional. It is indeed a presumption of guilt before the fact. And since when has it ever been possible to disprove a negative?

That wascally wabbit is twying to steal the twuth!

Please re-read #s 3 & 10 because that is where we are! A Lucianne thread in December based upon a Washington Times article put the initial number of vets impacted at 100,000 and stated:

The Department of Veterans Affairs forwards the names of those labeled mentally incompetent to the FBI for inclusion in a national federal database, barring them from purchasing or carrying firearms.

THREAD: Change on veterans’gun rights lights fire
http://www.lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=714365

WashTimes:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/3/change-on-veterans-gun-rights-lights-fire/?page=all#pagebreak

There is a bigger nugget of truth in this article than is being commented on here and it highlights Obama´s strategy against an armed populace (not just the returning military).

The article says that under the Brady law, if you are "determined as unable to manage your benefits (then this) prevents you from owning and possessing a firearm or ammunition."

So since slightly more than half of the U.S. is on some form of government program, it would seem logical that to reduce guns by half, all Obama has to do is enfore the Brady Law.

Given the direction of the economy (with Obama at the wheel for another 4 years), it is conceivable that that 50% could grow larger and larger.

So it has started with the Vets, but will eventually come to YOUR doorstep.

The fur bearing varmint is a very tiresome, one trick pony. Here is the distilled version of the last 300 posts....Mentally ill people should not have guns, therefore any restrictions placed on honest citizens are justified.
There. I just saved many hours of trolling.

I guess Bunny hasn´t heard or read that report released by DHS last year that labels vets, both old and new, as possible terrorists to be dealt with.

This is why I am totally against registering guns in the ways that are being suggested right now. Who wants the government deciding who is incompetent and who is not? We all know this is just the nose under the tent flap to pulling this garbage on conservatives and Christians as a way to attack religion, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/16/us/politics/16white-house-gun-proposals-documents.html (page 21)

Published: January 16, 2013
White House Gun Proposals
"...On Wednesday, President Obama unveiled a set of proposals to reduce gun violence, based on the determinations of a panel led by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. The White House described its plan in a collection of documents, outlining both executive orders that the president plans to issue and measures that must be adopted by Congress….”
-----------------------------


The #1 ‘Executive Action’
“Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require Federal Agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.” (NICS)


So the question at hand is: Will a diagnosis of PTSD by VA require reporting to NICS?

The answer is ‘YES."

Some statistics indicate that up to 30% of returning war veterans suffer some form of PTSD. And... PTSD isn’t a simple ‘yes-no’ diagnosis. There are almost as many degrees of PTSD as there are patients, with symptoms varying from bat-**** crazy to nightmares some nights.

To require VA to submit these lists of diagnosed PTSD vets to NICS, which automatically deprives them of their 2nd amendment rights and requires them to have to plead their case to have them restored is unconscionable.

Any wonder why the VA has been pushing PTSD? Yes, we´ve got veterans of our two recent wars with PTSD, but they are in the minority.

The Constitution doesn´t matter much to these cretins who think their pet social engineering project trumps any old document drawn up by rich white people!

If I didn´t know better, I´d think they were deliberatly "pokin´ the bear".