Letters to Vets About Taking Their Gun Rights? Endorsed by 98 U.S. Senators

vetaffairsA few days ago, several media sources started to report that our veterans are receiving letters which deprive them of their second amendment rights. I am rarely, if ever, the first to a story. This is the nature of being a “small potatoes” blogger. By time it gets to me the best thing I can do is develop it and fill in the blanks that the original sources omitted in their haste to be first. Sometimes the details are worse than the original story and I believe this is one of those cases. It really just depends on how deep you want to dig.

Yet again the American public is caught by surprise despite being warned that this was coming. I think there is a natural assumption, due to the mention of “The Brady Act” that this was put in place years ago and this is simply a new interpretation. This is not the case. Let’s go back to December 3, 2012 to find the only evidence I can see of a senator trying to stop this from happening. By the way, by my findings, the only big media sources to report this side of the story were Fox News and The Huffington Post. This is how they sneak these things through.

Here’s your warning shot:

defensebill“WASHINGTON — Should veterans deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their own financial affairs be prevented from buying a gun?

The issue, for a time last week, threatened to become the biggest sticking point in a $631 billion defense bill for reshaping a military that is disengaging from a decade of warfare.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sought to amend the bill to stop the Veterans Affairs Department from putting the names of veterans deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their finances into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which prohibits them from buying or owning firearms.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., objected, saying the measure would make it easier for veterans with mental illness to own a gun, endangering themselves and others.

‘I love our veterans, I vote for them all the time. They defend us,’ Schumer said. ‘If you are a veteran or not and you have been judged to be mentally infirm, you should not have a gun.'” Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/03/veterans-gun-rights-defense-bill_n_2230786.html

The next day the senate passed the 631 Billion Dollar Defense Bill by a margin of 98-0 and the Bill was not amended in favor of veteran’s gun rights. Coburn has promised to try to again, with future bills, to get this amended. We shall see. If the man did not cast a vote against the bill, I have to wonder what kind of priority it really is for him.

I think the fact that the “Brady Act” is being mentioned in these letters to our veterans, is an intentional ploy to mislead the public. This is not about something that happened in 1993, this is about something that Obama signed into law in January 2013. I think we need to see our current legislators for what they are. There was not one single “Nay” vote on this measure in the Senate.

OK now, let’s go back to the letter than is being sent, because I am sure that some missed it. The story originally broke with Michael Connelly, J.D., at Red Flag News:

“How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated: ‘A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).’?” Source: http://redflagnews.com/headlines/disarming-americas-heros-veterans-receiving-official-letters-prohibiting-them-from-purchasing-possessing-receiving-or-transporting-a-firearm-or-ammunition

So we know that the letters are being sent and we know what triggered them. What other blanks need to be filled in? For one, I think people deserve to know how many of these letters are going out, because it is not a small number.

houstonchronicle“Across the United States, approximately 122,271 veterans have been judged “incompetent” to manage their funds. Their $3.3 billion in assets are handled by VA-selected fiduciaries: family, friends or strangers screened by the government, according to information the VA provided to the Chronicle.” Source: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Family-seek-answers-for-veteran-s-missing-money-2499200.php

This particular story is a year old but 122,000 veterans is not an insignificant number. Does anyone really believe it will stop there? Now that they have a way to take gun rights from our veterans you need to look at the other pieces that seem to be falling into place, relating to this story.

bradybillFirst we need to look at what the Brady Handgun Violence Protection act is. It only covers guns sold by legal firearms dealers that require background checks. So the current push through the legislature, that looks like it will succeed, to require universal background checks on private sales will effectively take all possibility of these 122,000+ veterans ever legally purchasing a firearm again. We are not talking about “assault” weapons and handguns only. These men and women can’t even go deer hunting.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Once legislation is in place what is stopping that 122,000 number from growing? All we have to do is look at CNN, the federal government’s propaganda arm, to see where this may be leading:

“The study was published in the March 12 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine and carried out by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco and the San Francisco VA Medical Center.

ptsdThey looked at data from 103,788 veterans; about 13 percent of them women, 54 percent under age 30, nearly a third minorities and nearly half veterans of the National Guard or Reserves.

Of the total, 32,010 (31 percent) were diagnosed with mental health and/or psychosocial problems, including 25,658 who received mental health diagnoses. More than half (56 percent) were diagnosed with two or more disorders.

Post-traumatic stress disorder was the most common disorder, with the 13,205 veterans who got the diagnosis accounting for more than half (52 percent) of mental health diagnoses.” Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2007-03-13/us/stress.troops_1_substance-abuse-disorder-mental-health-anxiety-disorder?_s=PM:US

The fear here is obvious… Now that they have legal provisions in place, what is stopping our government from declaring more and more veterans as “mentally incapable” of handling their own affairs? Nothing.

122,000 is not an insignificant number but I expect that number to grow exponentially. Studies are in place that could literally “prove” that nearly 1/3 of all of our veterans are mentally incompetent. As of 2011 census numbers there were 21.5 million American Veterans. 31% of that number is about 7 million. 122,000 veterans is a “trial run” my friends. If we don’t get very loud in defense of the second amendment they will begin to go after others as well. This is how it is done, piece by piece and systematically.

dueprocessKeep in mind that this is being done without due process. These men and women are not getting a day in court to separate them from their second amendment rights. And, for anyone who wants to actually read the Brady Act, there is protection for those who are making these judgements. They can not be prosecuted or punished for mistakes in relation to this process. You have to love our lawmakers. They always protect government interests.

We must get to the bottom of this and we can not do that without looking at both sides of the debate. Are these veterans really a danger to our society, or is this more about other things?

“Many times, across this last decade of war, law enforcement leaders and trainers, politicians, business leaders, and media reporters have asked me, with great and sincere concern, about our returning veterans and their potential for violent interaction with police. They are worried about the ‘whacko veteran’ coming home and committing violent crimes. Is this a legitimate concern? Just how much should we worry about this possibility?

I heard a National Public Radio piece a few months ago, saying that, ‘Over a hundred veterans have come home and committed murder!’ Think about that for a minute… We’ve had over 2 million Americans in the war zone, and are currently in our 10th year of war. The Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics tells us that the homicide rate for Americans between ages 18-25 is around 25-per-100,000. (http://bjs. ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/ oagetab.cfm) So, out of any million Americans in that age group, there should be around 250 murders per year. Out of 2 million, there should have been 500 murders. Extrapolate that back across 10 years of war, and there should have been, statistically speaking, thousands of murders by this population group. All they ‘proved’ is that the murder rate for our vets is less than a tenth of that for other citizens of the same age! (Which is pretty much keeps with the stats from our past wars.)” -Lt.Col. Dave Grossman Source: http://www.recoverytoday.net/2011/55-august/350-the-myth-of-our-returning-veterans-and-violent-crime

What we have is a serious case of profiling. What if the government stated that African-American men were no longer allowed to own guns? Is that an absurd example. Yes and no. The point is that you could find statistics to back up a move like this but that doesn’t make the move right. The second amendment says “Shall Not Be Infringed” for a reason. Racial profiling is not acceptable in this country, but certain types of profiling are.

dangerousfreedomThomas Jefferson talked about preferring “dangerous freedom” and this is exactly the type of thing he was talking about. Will guns end up in the hands of some of the wrong people? Yes they will. But that’s part of the price of dangerous freedom. These veterans are not convicted felons who have given us reason to believe that they will go on uncontrolled shooting sprees. These are men and women who have come back from war, with a series of mental defects that they only incurred because of their defense of our freedoms. This is the ultimate slap in the face of American heroes and I don’t like it one bit.

We send them off to the hell that is war and when they get back we take away their most basic rights as Americans. The right to bear arms “Shall Not Be Infringed.” Period.

I believe this is more about taking the guns from those who know how to use them, and are not hesitant to kill another human being if that becomes necessary. The government is scared. They know that revolution is in the air. Why wouldn’t they disarm veterans? Do you really believe they will stop with 122,000? Veterans are the group that they fear the most. These are men and women who have been trained and proven in battle. These are the men and women who could genuinely make a difference in any future revolution.

ckyleoI can’t help but think of the timing of Chris Kyle’s death and wonder what a “coincidence” it is that this man was murdered shortly before this controversy hit. If there is any high-profile figure that would have stood up for veterans now, it would have been Chris Kyle.

Kyle’s idea of therapy for a PTSD victim was to take them deer hunting. It seems that our legislators, both democrats and republicans, definitely disagree with that.

Where does this leave us? I think we need to go back to the words of coburnSenator Tom Coburn who is quoted as saying, “All I am saying is, let them at least have their day in court if you are going to take away a fundamental right given under the Constitution.”

Senator, I would feel much better about your argument if I were reporting today that this measure passed the senate by a vote of 97-1. We must start electing people with backbones who are not afraid to stop dangerous legislation.

We must start to raise our voices against pieces of legislation that attempt to incorporate nonsensical measures like this one. This is what our lawmaking process has become.

Wake up America. They will find a way to get your guns and you must not remain silent.

This is simply not acceptable.

Molon Labe!

Follow The D.C. Clothesline on Facebook




Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

About Dean Garrison

Keep it simple. I believe in God, Family and Country (in that order). My articles can be freely reproduced in full, or in part, so long as you credit me as the author and provide some sort of link to www.dcclothesline.com. Send me a Friend Request on Facebook
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Letters to Vets About Taking Their Gun Rights? Endorsed by 98 U.S. Senators

  1. Roger says:

    Here we are seeing the beginnings of a 100% disregard of Constitutional Law !!!! Money bill
    for defense worded to take away our basic defense by the government ???? I don’t think so!!
    Defense for others and not at home.. Sounds or is a great communistic POT to place everyone outside their constitutional rights…as though government isn’t responsible…. NICE DEMOCRACY????

  2. huggies says:

    ok they or deemed mentally incompetent by who the goverment who wants it done no one has there rights taking away till this SOB came into the pic, they had PTSD from every war we have had. courts not anyone else can say u r mentally incompetent, but the SOB who in the WH thinks he can do what he wants. he reminds me of my 6th year year old grand kid who trows a fit if they do not get what they wants. my 4 year old would do a lot better than him!!!!!! is our r government, do we have a bunch of spoil rotten brats in government who do for them and not the people. their pay is to high for what they do (nothing but point finger) their medical is better than ours when we retired,all we work for we pay into SS is not a entitlement like there is they sit on butts and think they r working for us HAHAHAHA. I WANT A JOB LIKE THAT WHERE DO I SIGN UP


  3. Tony says:

    I say we get rid of ALL politicians who can’t handle Americas finances. Let’s get back to the root of Americas problems, the lack of morality and responsibility. The government is fine with us being dumb sheep. WE NEED WOLVES!! WE NEED TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!! IT IS OUR NATION MY FELLOW AMERICAN! We put them in office and they do what they want not what we want them to do. Where is the accountability? What can we do to punish them for not doing what we say? Not voting them back in is not good enough. If they pass a law or institute something that is not in the interest of WE THE PEOPLE and our freedom and Constitutional rights, THEY NEED TO GO TO JAIL or at least GO!

  4. Lehmon Baxley says:

    The more I think about Chris Kyle, the more I’m reminded of the old CIA project MK-Ultra in which they experimented with LSD trying to make mind controlled programed assassins. The project was supposed to be scrapped in the 60’s…but what if it has been continued behind closed doors? Just think of the technology changes since the 60’s, the new drugs that have been developed. Chris Kyle criticized Obama. Obama, like the Clintons has a long list of associates with unsolved murders and suspected murders. With the number of times the “facts” changed in the hours and days after the NewTown shooting I have doubts about that one too. Did you know that just a few months before the Newtown shooting, the chief medical examiner pushed and got a law passed saying that he did not have to make the autopsies of murdered children public? Coincidence?

  5. csaaphill says:

    Personally I beleive it’s because they know that Revolution is in the air, so they are disarming those that we would need to help in such a thing. Leave it to schumer too that unpatriotic peace of doo doo. He knew when he objected what he was doing.

  6. D. Oates says:

    How could this be going on since Vietnam if it was just voted on passed and signed into law in January of this year? Whose deeming them mentally impaired? Why are they not getting their day in court to defend themselves? Show me a legitamite article, a law or something that proves that this is not a new assault on the right to bear arms.

  7. This is an attempt to remove guns from the hands of people deemed mentally impaired. It has been going on since the Vietnam War. I see this article of lies as attempt to further mislead the public as the author attempts to uphold the right of mentally impaired people to own guns.

    • Joe Royall says:

      You seem to be confused. Since Vietnam? The law just passed this year Lower % of murders by veterans than in the general population but much higher % of veterans deemed not responsible. Misleading? Sir your comprehension has denigrated and you’re confused you can no longer own or posses a firearm and we will assign someone to take over your finances. How does it feel motherf***er?

  8. Rick L. says:

    Confronting Obama and his Communist regime is what I call fighting for America. It’s not going to Nam, Iraq or some other country to fight somebody else’s War while our government stabs us in the back.


    I HAVE SAID THIS BE FOR…….Law enforcement of all branches and military of all branches have a hard job to do. they fight for our freedom and withhold the law of the Constitution each and every day so that we can sleep better and feel safer. Having a son that is looking forward to a career in law enforcement and having friends and family who have served and are serving in the military. I keep them in prayer along with all the other men and women doing their duty in and for the US. They have taken a pledge to protect and serve and I do believe that they will withhold the law as much as they can without giving up the freedom that they so much love and violating the Constitution that so many have died for. We will not stand by and watch this country that so many have died for slip into the grasp of people that want to be the next Hitler!!!!I want to thank all the men and women that have served or are serving in our military, our law enforcement of all branches, cause I know that when the day comes the American people from all branches of law enforcement and military are going to stand on the side of freedom.We face times where its about the power that money gives. WE as patriotic people need to stand up and not shout, but scream to the very few people in this free land trying to take away our inherited right to think for ourselves. If we give in we cannot ever go back!!!!!!! THIS IS THE USA….NOT Obama ville????? Thank you all for your service……GOD BLESS YOU!!!!!!!PS.They cannot have OUR GUNS!!!! NO THEY CAN NOT HAVE THEM!!!!!

  10. Stan says:

    Dean Garrison , Keep up the fight.
    Thank you Stan

  11. Bill says:

    When called upon, they, just like gang members will come with needed weapons.. This will not keep them from getting weapons as it did not our forefathers!

  12. Diane Crouse says:

    This is an excellent article and I am sharing it every where I can and asking others to do the same. Thanks to all of you that here that have served in our Military and are still willing to serve to protect our liberties and our Nation here at home. My husband is a Vietnam Vet and my son was in the Air force 6 years and now serve in the Iowa Air Guard. The things that are happening to all of our liberties and this Nation very alarming to us. It is good to know others that are sounding the alarms and taking a stand on these things. God bless and keep you all.

  13. I’ve been researching this, too. If you are declared incompetent to handle your financial affairs, you PROBABLY cannot own a gun. I take exception to your saying such a vet can buy a gun legally outside of FFL dealers. By a strict interpretation, they cannot even have one in their possession.

    You don’t need to be mentally incompetent, you only need to be DECLARED incompetent to handle your own financial affairs. Someone reports it to the VA, anyone can make the referral, and a bureaucrat there makes the determinatiuon about your overall competence.

    I am working on an article about the bigger picture, which includes this tactic as a part of the overall back-door strategy on the part of the federal government to disenfranchise ownership without having to ban guns outright.

    If you are looking at that $2000.00 gun, and they only have the $1400.00 version that is similar and just as servicable, you might consider buying it. And also buying an additional $600.00 gun. Someday, you may need to loan it to your veteran neighbor. Or any neighbor.

  14. Lehmon Baxley says:

    I fear this is just the beginning, and it will be happening across all segments of our society. When they started talking about so-called “common sense” measures to control gun violence after Sandy Hook, and we all said, the concentration needs to be put on mental health, not guns. This is the beginning of my worst fears, that politicians and bureaucrats are going to start taking it upon themselves to determine what “mental health issues” are, and who has them. The end result being, “anyone who would want to own a gun, must have mental issues.” They want to dis-arm America by whatever means necessary, and nothing is beneath these people. My thanks to ALL of the veterans out there who served our country. The fight at home is just beginning, and we will continue to need you. Your experience is going to be invaluable in the fight we will be facing together.

  15. mrballroom says:

    Whatever bug is mounted transverse up their shorts, easily gets you on the sh*t list FOR LIFE…FOREVER…NO-FLY LIST, NO GUN LIST…YOU NAME IT!’

    Next thing you know, SECRET ASSASSINATION SQUAD, where they start killing anyone that might resist the TYRANNY IMPOSITION TEAM (TITS FOR BRAINS…)…just a thought…


  16. bdwatcher @bdwatcher says:

    We still don’t know what the parameters and means testing that deems these vets incompetetant to take care of themselves. It is unemployed? Those with amputations? Vets with blindness? Anyone other than mentally deficient by what I have read, anyone with help from the govt when you are a vet. you are on this list.

  17. Hitler all over again. Seig Heil

  18. Jeff Bergmann says:

    We really need to just nip this whole ordeal in the bud. How can a vet be diagnosed with PTSD, be fit for battle and not fit to handle a weapon. Riddiculous. Let’s dig into the cretens of society. LAW ENFORCEMENT. Let’s get all their mental health records right out in the open and lets’ take their weapons, too. The way some of those asses act with excessive force, the God complex, Napoleonic complexes, roid rage, PTSD, paranoia, and OCD all wrapped up in one. These are the true loose cannons out there.

  19. Ed Ciet says:

    Excellent article and oh so correct. If only this article would go viral.

  20. mrballroom says:

    This is but ONE of the main reasons I believe that military service should be a REQUIREMENT for those seeking elected office. Back in the 1970’s — when I first got involved in politics — most congresscritters and senators were veterans, and understood America came FIRST. Not anymore.

    Whether Democrat or Republican, they understood that when push came to shove, they put differences aside and circled the wagons when a LEGITIMATE threat to national security emerged.

    Today (post 9/11), most of these PUSSIES have never worn a uniform A DAY IN THEIR LIVES, mock the good men and women who HAVE worn the uniform, and don’t know sh*t — much less give one — about the sacrifices good and honorable men and women make in order that those pompous, arrogant, self-serving ego-masturbatory bastards can sleep under the very freedom we have provided them, and then (in the words of Jack Nicholson’s character from ‘A Few Good Men’ [1992]), then have the gall to question the manner in which we provide that freedom.

    I would just as soon they go find a REAL job – -something Chuck Schumer has NEVER had, resign from and leave office to those who DO CARE about the country, and then promptly go crawl under the rock form whence they came, in the earnest hopes it rises up just high enough to fall on their skulls and CRUSH them,

    There is no subspecies in America more deserving. ***

  21. Jeff says:

    I am by far not a psychiatrist and neither are our politicians. I am how ever a combat Vet, Our founding fathers was combat Vets. They seen more horror than I or any other Vet of today would ever want to see. You know they was blessed with PTSD some I’m sure even had TBI. They was in the Revolutionary war and wrote the United States Constitution. Who do these politicians of today think they are to not fight for their country, support and defend the Constitution but to rather destroy the credibility, rights and profile our Vets as some kind of monsters coming back home to kill. Most of us want to just live our life’s under the rights we so called fought for.

    • AmericanMom777 says:

      They, this socialist government, wants to discredit every good and honorable institution and person that they can so no one will have hope in anything but the government and be totally dependent on the government. This is dispicable!

  22. Eric Yoder says:

    That plan makes sense. If you’re trying to disarm a country, that is. Take out the better trained, experienced, skilled opposition. What you have left, at least at this time, is a bunch of disconnected, lesser trained/experienced, non organized civilians. It’s called “divide & conquer”.
    I’d be interested to know if any new militia groups have formed since all this bullshit started. I haven’t read or heard about any. I also haven’t seen a call go out from current militia groups. Make no mistake, I’m not abdicating for violence against our government or anyone. Id be more than happy to settle things peacefully with due process as our founding fathers wanted but we also shouldn’t wait for something extremely dire to happen before we at least “train” for any possibilities that could require us to defend ourselves.

    • Lester says:

      I know it sucks right, but think insurgency. Hide in the open, defense in depth and force multiplication, look these things up. You would never be able to fight from a static position, no logistical capability, traditional firearms would only be good in limited situations quick strikes and hit and runs. Is far better reach into their chest from the shadows snatch their hearts out and sling them straight into hell. Make them be the bad guy make them kick in granny’s door and place her in detention opinion will turn the tide, it always does, this is going to be a long hard fight still a ways off and years in the making.

  23. Dean Garrison says:

    I feel that I left one very crucial element out of this article and I’m kicking myself for it. Keep the timeline of this in mind. This vote was taken about 10 days before Sand Hook ever happened. Why is this important? I think it’s important to note that our lawmakers have had goals of taking our guns for a long time, and Sandy Hook was just the latest excuse to heighten the debate.

    • This is from a press release on her website, ““I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation,” Feinstein added. “It will be carefully focused on the MOST DANGEROUS guns that have KILLED SO MANY PEOPLE over the years while protecting the rights of gun owners by exempting hundreds of weapons that fall outside the bill’s scope. We must take these DANGEROUS WEAPONS OF WAR off our streets.” Of course, FBI stats prove her words to be absolutely false, but that’s not stopping her from repeating the lies. Was she waiting for just the right ‘opportunity’ to reveal her ban? Holding it back until another tragic mass shooting happened and the country would be in the right ‘mood’ to be in favor of legislation that would violate our 2ndA right? I agree with your opinion that the timing of all of this is very suspicious and says a lot about their real intentions.

  24. Zakk Osborne says:

    This might not have anything to do with PTSD, it might simply be a matter of drawing ANY level of disability compensation from the VA. Possibly even those of us with a mere 10% rating. People with disability ratings for things like hurt backs, shoddy knees, etc are getting these letters, not just the PTSD crowd.

  25. American Patriot says:

    This has been one of my worst fears since getting out of the Army. I have several friends who are recieving VA compensation for PTSD and fear they will be getting screwed in the long run. How can someone be diagnosed with PTSD and be fit for combat but not be allowed to exercise their 2nd Ammendment right once they return. With two deployments myself I consider myself llucky to not have been diagnosed with PTSD. I know for myself and Veteran friends shooting is one of our favorite activities. It seems to help some of the guys with PTSD to relax. Am I afraid to be around them when they have weapons? No of course not.

    This is just another example of the politicians trying to control everything we do. Of course they are worried about Veterans with weapons. We will be some of the first to step up when the revolution begins. Not only are we well trained in weapons and tactics, we have the intestinal fortitiude to stand up for what we believe in, why do you think we served in the first place!

    Don’t tread on me or I will be forced to strike with every part of my being, and trust me I will have a few of my like-minded friends by my side.

    Thanks again Dean, keep the information flowing.

    • Dean Garrison says:

      Thank You for your service to our country. Our challenge is to make sure that this service was not in vain.

    • How many military Dr’s will be REQUIRED to declare a person that they have PTSD

      • Scott Kalbach says:

        Makes you wonder if they are trying to get people to not enlist for fear of being tagged. Or maybe I should say, they are trying find a way to select who can serve the machine.

    • bubba gump says:

      It goes deeper than that!
      This is a precedent that any veteran with a history of financial irresponsibility must also be irresponsible with a weapon.

      Now we could trust that same vet with a weapon while he was away at war, but not now that he has returned.

      Since the vast majority (I’d say 80%) of military personnel have at sometime in their lives had a problem with money – then they could feasibly say that 80% can’t be trusted with a gun.

  26. joe010106 says:

    Dean, how can I get a list of senators that voted for this.

Leave a Reply