Printer Friendly

No guns for social security recipients?

The Los Angeles Times reported in July that the Obama administration is pushing a plan to submit the names of up 4.2 million recipients of Social Security benefits to the FBI's National Instant Check System. People in NICS are not just barred from purchasing firearms, they are "prohibited persons" for whom possession of firearms and ammunition is illegal under the Gun Control Act. It is a felony for them to be in possession or have access to firearms or ammunition under any circumstances, and it is a felony for anyone to knowingly allow a prohibited person access to a firearm or ammunition.

The law regarding "prohibited persons" has become increasingly broad since its adoption in 1968. It was originally intended to restrict violent felons, fugitives, people with dangerous mental disorders, and others who pose a significant threat to public safety, but in fact took away the rights of many non-violent offenders and people who would not be considered dangerous. With the addition of the Lautenberg Amendment in the 1990s, the prohibition was expanded to include anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Under this provision, a wife fined $25 for slapping a cheating husband's face is barred from possession of firearms for life.

The law (USC Title 18, Section 922, subsection g.) reads, anyone "who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution," is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition.

Note the key word "adjudicated." While most reasonable people would interpret that to mean, a ruling from a court, the implementing regulations for this law use a much broader definition. The relevant section of the Federal Code of Regulations (27 C.F.R. 478.11) states:

"(1) A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:

* Is a danger to himself or to others; or

* Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs." Many years ago, under Clinton, the Veterans Administration began submitting names to NICS of veterans and dependent beneficiaries who they said met that definition of "mentally defective," including anyone who is not considered able to manage their own VA benefits.

The VA makes this "incompetence" determination not through a court or commission, but through its own bureaucratic process. There is no judge, or even a determination from a physician required, and the VA determination of incompetence is not binding on any other aspect of the person's life. A person rated as "mentally incompetent" under the VA can still enter into contracts, buy and sell real estate, incorporate a business, marry, divorce, or even adopt a child. The only things they can't do, as far as I can tell, are sign VA-related documents or purchase or possess firearms or ammunition.

The Social Security Administration standards for "incompetence" are similar, it is merely a bureaucratic finding that the person's interests are best served by having their benefits processed through what they call a "Representative Payee" rather than going directly to the beneficiary. If the Obama administration gets their way, all of these people will also be prohibited from ever possessing a firearm or ammunition--even under close supervision--for the rest of their lives.

For most people, a determination of incompetence and the assignment of a fiduciary results in additional financial benefits. Both the VA and Social Security can treat this, as an additional disability and increase benefit payments accordingly. In the VA system, this can result in benefit payments going up as much as $1000 per month or more. That can be a pretty strong incentive for a person to go along with, or even seek, an incompetency determination. Some people, when they discover that this is going to cost them their right to arms, have tried to fight the system, but saving their rights means giving up the additional financial assistance--and that can be a tough choice.

Nobody wants violent lunatics and suicidal individuals to get their hands on guns, but infringing on the rights of millions of innocent, harmless citizens is by no means a reasonable way for the VA or Social Security to attempt that.

Republicans failed to address this problem when they controlled both Houses of Congress and the White House, but they have had a bill in congress every session for the past five years called the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, which would correct VA's dangerous overreach by requiring an actual adjudication that a person is a danger to themselves or others, before firearms rights could be revoked. Now that they once again control Congress, things aren't looking much better. The last time I checked, the bill only had four House cosponsors.

If you are outraged by this situation, your elected representatives need to hear from you. The VA practice needs to be stopped, and it must not be allowed to spread to Social Security or other government programs. You can reach your Senators and Representative through their House.gov and Senate.gov links, or by calling 202-224-3121.
COPYRIGHT 2015 InterMedia Outdoors, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:THE KNOX UPDATE: From The Firearms Coalition
Author:Knox, Jeff
Publication:Shotgun News
Date:Sep 20, 2015
Words:847
Previous Article:Diana 340 N-TEC Classic: this Diana gas-spring is a solid performer!
Next Article:"Will NYC be there? Or Fred, the poor ...".
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters