TAKE ACTION: Comment period: SSA to determine you are prohibited and report to NICS

[323MAR]

It's too bad that the Brady(whore) Law was not repealed by the Republican majority in Congress with Bush in office. No one would be rejected if there is no background check. We now see that the background check was a Trojan Horse that can be used to deny anyone the purchase of a lawful firearm. Once this law is in place, you brainwash the public into accepting this red tape as normal over a period of time. After that, you institute more restrictions on who gets approved until only a minority of the population can legally own firearms.
This is only the beginning if we get Crooked Hillary elected.

 

[Vermiform]

Bump. Comment period still open.

Fact pattern exercise: What if someone suffers a stroke that renders that person unable to do math including activities of daily living involving math. That person cannot distinguish between ten dollars and a thousand dollars, how much money should be in his/her accounts or how much to pay for goods and services. That person was an accountant so he/she justifiably now collects disability from SSA. This person has been found to need a representative payee as he/she is unable to manage his/her affairs for the purposes of SSA disability payments.

The person suffers from no other disabilities resulting from the stroke and is safe in keeping and bearing firearms. The person actually finds therapeutic benefits from going shooting. Should this person be automatically reported to NICS as prohibited?

Here are some better scenarios:

Scenario #1:
You have money and guns. You have adult children. You like to gamble. Your children decide you are gambling their inheritance away too quickly. They speak to a SOCIAL WORKER about securing your government retirement or SSI checks. The social worker doesn't like gambling or guns. The social worker even enlists the help of a doctor just to speed things up. You now have to get rid of all your guns but that's ok you can appeal this, but sorry the wait for that is now 2 years.......

Scenario #2:
Your dad is getting up there in years. He owns many firearms and is also on a budget because he is retired and on a fixed income. You move him in with you or move in with him. One of your siblings is an alcoholic/addict, needs money, is jealous of you, etc and needs money. They convince a SOCIAL WORKER to investigate a false claim that you are stealing your father's money. The social worker is also anti-gun, snotty as f*ck, and a liberal....as most graduates in the social arts tend to be. You get pissed and tell them to pound sand............

 

[Nathan Hale]

I just went to the govt. site to comment. Was unable to do so because the site was undergoing "maintenance until May 14; and, there were only 258 comments so far.

Comment period closes July 5.

 

[Rainsdrops]

I dont understand how any gun owner would agree with this. In the history of our gun laws, all of them have been amended. these amendments never benefit gun owners.
Gun Laws that restricted ownership doesn't stop gun violence. it just doesn't work.

Ask some of our LE members if they ever ran across a convicted felon with a gun,
or pulled a driver over, that had a suspended license.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I am opposed to it.

 

[WildBillKelso]

Bump. Comment period still open until July 5th.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I just posted my comment in opposition. (Site is back up and receiving comments.)

If you oppose, please comment. It can make a difference if enough people comment.

(Best to keep comments brief. People have to read them for them to have full effect.)


WildBill: might be a good idea to "bump" this once a week until the comment period is closed.

 

[WildBillKelso]

Nod. I'll bump, TTT or whatever they call it weekly.

 

[WildBillKelso]

Memorial day bump. As it is Memorial day, please note that the Veterans Affairs is already doing something similar and there is a bill going through congress to stop that. It will be easier to stop it happening in Social Security at the rule proposal level.

One can also write an email to their Federal legislators regarding this rule change. Might as well put them on alert.

Lastly, an unnamed source tells me that in some cases, SSA can find someone needs a representative payee but then will later be found to not need a representative payee. This typically happens in short term and/or minor disability cases and it is an easy process to return to direct payments. I doubt under this rule change that those people will be as easily removed from NICS as a prohibited person.

 

[WildBillKelso]

thread bump. 15 more days to comment.

 

[Nathan Hale]

There has only been 3774 comments thus far! That is nothing. We beat the "green tip ammo ban", we can beat this. Please express your opposition! The link to the comment site is in the original post.

 

[OutOfAmmo]

Obama said this was coming so it should not be a surprise to anyone. This is a 60 day comment period for the rule change. The Social Security Administration wants to determine you cannot own a firearm if it determines you cannot manage your finances to receive your SSA benefits. This is a stacked deck and it takes place in their own administrative offices using their rules and their definitions. Please take the time to at least write that you are against it.

here are the links.

https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=SSA-2016-0011
https://www.ssa.gov/regulations/NPRM--Implementation%20of%20the%20NICS%20Improvement%20Amendments%20Act%20of%202007%20%28NIAA%29.PDF

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160429/social-security-administration-releases-proposed-rulemaking-on-disability-related-gun-ban

Thanks for the link.... made it easy to do my part and say get your hands off my rights

 

[mike84z28]

It appears this ruling means that if an individual is mentally incompetent as determend by numerious doctors and at least one judge that they would lose their right to purchase a firearm. There are people out there that are not responsible enough to own firearms. If anyone does not agree with this they need to be evaluated. This is not about 2nd A. rights it is about trying to keep firearms out of the wrong hands.

This is about 2A rights, They would never do this to remove any other of your rights, why is this one any less of a right ?

 

[OutOfAmmo]

here's a great clip of Trey Gowdy toasting Clueless DHS Expert on the 2A https://www.facebook.com/gagunowners/videos/1228655230502562/?pnref=story

 

[WildBillKelso]

I'm ressurecting this thread because the house and senate now voted to strike down this regulation under the Congressional Review Act. This means that once Trump signs off on this the agency cannot make a materially similar regulation in the future.
http://http://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-votes-to-repeal-obama-gun-rule/