Social security gun ban is coming :(

Post Reply New Topic

Indeed. U.S. public policy has, since its founding, considered the restriction of any individual's constitutional right to be the sole realm of the federal courts. That requirement is fulfilled in this matter under the enactment of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968. The proposed Social Security Administration regulation would be unconstitutional and illegal under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses. Watch for more than one lawsuit if the regulation is adopted.

https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentD ... -0011-0001

It's a proposed rule change(law by agency bypass congress) to have the social security illegally determine whether people are mentally defective or not. The actual law made by congress states no federal agency should determine that, as well as no determination of mentally defective should be based on medical findings for disability payments. Which is exactly what the ssa is planning to do.

So instead of going through your day of court as a individual and being judged on your actions or whether your a threat or not, the ssa will instead ban you solely based on you being born non nt and blanket ban millions regardless of them not being a threat and treat them all as violent people. They'll being forced to do this by Obama who is pissed Americans don't want his gun control so he's hitting us whenever he can. He's throwing a tantrum like a kid who didn't get the toy he wanted in a store.

This is only going to 1.hurt people with disabilities by removing their rights, 2. Stigmatize them as violent and dangerous people who can't be trusted, if we can't be trusted why would anyone hire us, date us, befriend us. Leading us down the road of the past where eventually people,born different were just mass intuitionized.

Whether one likes guns or not, if one supports Aspies and other disabled people being treated fairly and like nts, then one wouldn't support this along with all past presidents, congress, most doctors, all the disability groups are against it too from what I've seen. Only one who really wants this is Obama.

It's my understanding that this is an existing law that requires the VA and the SSA to report anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary to the NICS background check system. The VA already does this. The SSA's own review said they might not have to do this, and Obama issued an executive order clarifying the issue.

Since 2008, VA beneficiaries have been able to get off the list by filing an appeal and demonstrating that they pose no danger to themselves or others.

Source: http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/ ... story.html

Sooo, presumed guilty by bureaucratic fiat until proven innnocent by (costly) federal courts?!? We are talking about the Bill of Rights which Jefferson himself said shouldn't be infringed without a jury trial.

I cite the Supreme Court decision, DC Vs. Heller. Delivered by Justice Scalia in 2008:

Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html

J. Scalia was, by discussing prohibitions as “longstanding[,]” clearly discussing existing law at the time (however imprecisely by employing the phrase “mentally ill” as opposed to the pre-existing lawful phrase “mental defective” … perhaps he was simply trying to be kind and tactful without yielding to any reinterpretation of law) primarily, it would seem, the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and no hypothetical future law.

While his statement about existing laws was accurate, his statement which refered to the idea about “laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms” has never been settled in common law. In 2014, former Colorado Assistant Attorney General David B. Kopel wrote that “[t]he First Amendment protects both book buyers and booksellers. Does the Second Amendment protect only people who buy guns, or does it also protect people who sell guns? Though this question has divided the federal courts, the answer is quite clear: Operating a business that provides Second Amendment services is protected by the Second Amendment. District of Columbia v. Heller teaches that regulation of how firearms are commercially sold enjoys a presumption of constitutionality, which does not extend to prohibitions of firearms sales.” Kopel’s commentary is a more accurate portrayal of the status of the matter than J. Scalia described. We cannot, therefore, presume that J. Scalia’s statement has any influence on this matter.

Moreover, as perhaps the most ardent and frequent defender of the original interpretation of the Second Amendment in recent decades, he would have been loathe to see a constitutionally guaranteed natural right restricted by the likes of a mere regulation (with neither congressional nor court support) which, in fact, would be inharmonious with existing law and contitutional interpretation.

The law is quite clear on the two ways someone can be determined mentally defective and this isn't one of the two. It actually clearly states this is illegal. The ssa Is a federal agency, federal agencies are not allowed to determine someone mentally defective.

Only a court can do that. Some burocrat isn't a judge and the ssa isn't a court.

There no way to appeal their decision either. I don't get why you're fine with some guy who'll never see you knows nothing about you arbitrarily illegally labeling you defective and void of your rights and freedoms and there fore a sub human.

What the va is doing is illegal just becaus people don't care doesn't make it right or legal.

No one cared about enslaving blacks did that make it right?

People are self centered they don't give a s**t unless it effects them directly. They wouldn't care if tommow the government decided to kill you because it's not them being killed. So I guess it's ok the government kills you since they can and no one cares therefore it must be ok.

That's your logic

They aren't making a legal determination that you are mentally ill, they are making a determination that you might be, based on medical information, and they are being prudent about prohibiting your ability to purchase new guns. It's like the no-fly list, it isn't a determination that you are a terrorist.

They should probably include a provision for counseling those people who might take it personally.

Except the law doesn't remove gun rights because you might be mentally ill. It because you are mentally ill and if not then you don't lose your rights. Even if you are you have to pose a clear threat to others.

What's next mass arresting blacks because they might commit a crime

What yes it us. Omg the no fly list is exactly that it's people who are known terrorist or with strong ties to terrorists. Based on omg you ready, ------->evidence<------- or least it's suppose to but then senators end up on it by accident.


Why don't you just f**k off, go turn yours self in to the police and tell them you're mentally ill and like,y to commit a mass shooting, since you clearly think all Aspies are and guess what you're a f*****g aspie.

Betting you're prone to violence, and that's why you want guns banned, well I not you, I'm not like you. If you're such a huge risk to society go turn yourself in and leave the rest of us alone.

If you don't leave my thread alone I'm just going ask it to be locked and make one in heaven will you can't sensely me and other aspies.mif wp would have a firearms section I'd posted it there. I didn't want w f*****g debate but this is the only section we can post about firearms which is f*****g dumb.

Leave us the f**k alone

Why is there a no-fly list at all? Shouldn't they just arrest those people instead?

If I was getting disability and couldn't manage my finances, I wouldn't trust myself with a gun either. And where are these people getting the money for guns? All the money they spend on a gun is theft from the government.

Leave me alone , you're just s stupid bully like nts. You have no f*****g ideal how the system works. I had a reverse time payee chosen for me when I was - f*****g child. Millions of people are given payees. it being able to f*****g manage a bank account does put mane s**t. Most men til recently didn't do it, wife's managed the money. So according to you most men shouldn't have guns or drive cars. Money managing doesn't equate smart or responsible.

Leave me lone leave me alone. Go bulky some other aspie, why are you even on this site if you have such a little horrible view of Aspies.

Yeah, you're definitely unstable, easily angered, and have delusions of persecution. I'll stop making my argument now, since you're doing such a fine job of it all by yourself.

I'm not angry, immfucking sad because you won't leave me alone.

I've asked this thread be locked.
You have no decency as a human or you'd left me alone , you said your peace many times, everyone is agreed, you should have left it at that. Go make your own thread if you want to bash low class Aspies. But no you have to keep attacking and attacking. Well no s**t if you push someone enough their push back whopping do. Go shove random people over and over and I bet their hit you. I'm a peaceful person but I'm not going be hurt over and over and not defend myself.