100,000 Veterans Declared ‘Mentally Defective,” Denied Second Amendment Rights

[Gold Eagle]

Tried search and was surprised this has not come up.

Seems vets are being "labeled" mental defective when applying for V.A. benefits.

So, any advice from someone here receiving V.A. benefits. How does one avoid getting on the "list"?

My buddy, who passed away, got on V.A. benefits. A past HAM radio licensee, a machinist, gunsmith, and Viet Vet. They made him see a shrink. Is this procedure for new applicants? The shrink claimed he was depressed and gave him a handful of prescriptions which he just threw away. He had lung and heart issues.


https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015...ostly-veterans


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...reporting.html

[Oldrotorhead]

I have a disability that does not involve PTSD or TBI. I also get medication for "anger management" and still have my 2A rights and have had a CHL for close to 2 decades. I don't know anyone that is part of that 100,000 number and I know quite a few people with VA disabilities.
Sorry I can't be of more help.

[JJ_BPK]

There have been laws on the books for generations that in one form or the other will deny 2nd amendment rights to persons that are adjudicated mentally unfit.

1)The "adjudicated" has many interpretations, depending on jurisdiction(fed, state, local)

2)Vets that ask for and receive PTSD classification and are awarded a disability, is being intrepid as "adjudicated" by the VA and DoJ.

I disagree, but until it is challenged at the SCOTUS level???

[Team Sergeant]

If you put in for PTSD and receive 100% disability for it maybe it's a good idea you're not around things that go bang......

Especially when only about 5-10% of those receiving PTSD disability are true suffers.

[Gold Eagle]

Thanks. From what I have read on the net. If a applicant signs off for someone else to handle their affairs and finances, or their spouse already handles paying the bills etc. They get on the "list"

Quote from.... http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...reporting.html


The VA can decide that a veteran is no longer mentally fit to handle benefits and finances and will then appoint what is called a fiduciary, often a family member but sometimes an outside party who manages their affairs.


"Under the current practice, a VA finding that concludes that a veteran requires a fiduciary to administer benefit payments effectively voids his Second Amendment rights -- a consequence which is wholly unrelated to and unsupported by the record developed in the VA process," the senator wrote. I also read the Glenn Beck stated a few years ago for vets not to sign off on the form. It may come down to (read before you sign)

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Gold Eagle

"Under the current practice, a VA finding that concludes that a veteran requires a fiduciary to administer benefit payments effectively voids his Second Amendment rights -- a consequence which is wholly unrelated to and unsupported by the record developed in the VA process," the senator wrote. I also read the Glenn Beck stated a few years ago for vets not to sign off on the form. It may come down to (read before you sign)

Another part of the 'system'.

As TS spoke,, if you need someone to tend your affairs, be it PTSD or alzheimer's or substance addiction or any other serious medical disability??

You probably should not have toys that go bang..

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

If you put in for PTSD and receive 100% disability for it maybe it's a good idea you're not around things that go bang......

Especially when only about 5-10% of those receiving PTSD disability are true suffers.

Besides, we give the enemy PTSD. Am I not correct, what?

[Roguish Lawyer]

https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/pre...ue-process-act