Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

HAB911

(9,362 posts)
Fri Feb 3, 2017, 08:42 AM Feb 2017

GOP Votes To End Obama Rule Designed To Keep Mentally Ill From Buying Guns

The expanded background check was a response to the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre.

WASHINGTON ― Congressional Republicans want to undo an Obama administration initiative designed to keep mentally ill people from buying guns.

The House of Representatives voted Thursday, mostly along partisan lines, to stop the Social Security Administration from telling the FBI about disability insurance recipients who have mental impairments that should disqualify them from buying guns.

The Obama administration pushed the measure as part of a broader gun control effort following the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The Social Security Administration finalized the rule in December.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association blasted the initiative as unconstitutional gun-grabbing. Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas) introduced legislation to block the rule last year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-gun-control-mentally-ill-obama-rule_us_5893e15be4b04061313629d3?wuyqz9j6rg3uqsemi&

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
GOP Votes To End Obama Rule Designed To Keep Mentally Ill From Buying Guns (Original Post) HAB911 Feb 2017 OP
Some years ago in Kansas they got rid of the limitations on blind people having a concealed carry tblue37 Feb 2017 #1
I remember reading about that. Hangingon Feb 2017 #3
"What could go wrong?" pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #8
Well? What went wrong? linuxman Feb 2017 #9
Piqued my curiosity. yagotme Feb 2017 #16
Now they are responsible C_U_L8R Feb 2017 #2
Otherwise their base could not purchase firearms. dae Feb 2017 #4
LOL! It's Obama's fault HAB911 Feb 2017 #5
Mentally ill? From your link ... Straw Man Feb 2017 #6
How comfortable are you with making the Social Security Administration the arbiter of mental health, sarisataka Feb 2017 #7
I guess Einstein would make the list, yagotme Feb 2017 #11
Post removed Post removed Feb 2017 #10
The title on the Huff article is rather misleading. ManiacJoe Feb 2017 #12
Everyone enraged by this should be enraged at Kamala Harris. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #13
The Senate voted to block the background check rule 57-43. Eugene Feb 2017 #14
Good! The rule was opposed by the ACLU and various other disability rights advocacy organizations. Marengo Feb 2017 #15
The SSA Doesn't Get to Make Laws Rucker61 Feb 2017 #17
welcome to DU gopiscrap Feb 2017 #18

tblue37

(66,035 posts)
1. Some years ago in Kansas they got rid of the limitations on blind people having a concealed carry
Fri Feb 3, 2017, 08:43 AM
Feb 2017

permit. What could go wrong?

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
8. "What could go wrong?"
Sat Feb 4, 2017, 02:45 AM
Feb 2017

What could possibly be a more trite, hackneyed cliche? Why don't you provide evidence of what "went wrong".

HAB911

(9,362 posts)
5. LOL! It's Obama's fault
Fri Feb 3, 2017, 01:20 PM
Feb 2017

TOO FUNNY

Republican struggles to explain why GOP just voted to let severely mentally ill people get guns


Straw Man

(6,775 posts)
6. Mentally ill? From your link ...
Fri Feb 3, 2017, 02:25 PM
Feb 2017
Gun enthusiasts aren’t the only ones skeptical of the disability background check scheme, however. The National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency that advises the government on disability issues, has frowned on the policy.

“Including anyone beyond those who are currently prohibited from gun purchase under existing law in such an effort would advance an inaccurate and discriminatory inference that equates the need for assistance in managing finances with a presumption of incapacity in other areas of life,” the agency said in a statement last year.

Quite a stretch to equate difficulty managing finances with mental illness. How comfortable are you with making the Social Security Administration the arbiter of mental health, without due process?

sarisataka

(21,007 posts)
7. How comfortable are you with making the Social Security Administration the arbiter of mental health,
Fri Feb 3, 2017, 04:30 PM
Feb 2017

without due process?

If it involves guns-

due process?- an idea as archaic as the Second Amendment itself. Your local police know you best and those bastions of civil liberties can decree your worthiness as a citizen. Unless a faceless bureaucracy has previously determined you are defective.

equal protection?- an idea almost as old. Local communities should pick and choose what rights may be exercised and by whom

presumption of innocence?- GWB was a true genius establishing an inviolate, opaque, list that accurately lists every person who is a threat to their fellow citizens. Beside you can always appeal if you find out you are on said list and can find an agency to file an appeal with. They are obligated to respond within your lifetime, or slightly longer, but do not have to confirm you are on the list, why you are on the list or if your appeal will be given any consideration. Be sure to include any information proving you are not the person identified on the list.

yagotme

(3,819 posts)
11. I guess Einstein would make the list,
Sun Feb 5, 2017, 06:30 PM
Feb 2017

since it is believed he couldn't balance his own checkbook...

Response to HAB911 (Original post)

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
12. The title on the Huff article is rather misleading.
Thu Feb 9, 2017, 06:10 PM
Feb 2017

Or the author has some odd beliefs about what a mental illness is.

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
15. Good! The rule was opposed by the ACLU and various other disability rights advocacy organizations.
Wed Feb 15, 2017, 05:59 PM
Feb 2017

I would recommend avoiding the comments section of the linked article though, the ignorance and histrionics on display are appalling.

Rucker61

(6 posts)
17. The SSA Doesn't Get to Make Laws
Thu Feb 16, 2017, 11:39 AM
Feb 2017

This rule said one thing, and one thing only: that recipients of SSID and SSI funds, which are dispersed by the SSA, who had been assigned a representative payee due to mental incompetence should have their names sent to NICS as prohibited persons.

Although the SSA claims that anyone who has been assigned a representative payee has been declared mentally incompetent by a court, there's no proof that this is the case. There's also no support for a claim that those so declared incapable of managing their funds are dangerously mentally ill. There are likely thousands of mentally ill SSID and SSI recipients who are capable of managing their money and therefore not on the list. No other mentally ill people get their names sent to NICS unless they've been adjudicated mentally incompetent by a court of law or have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution, in accordance with 18 USC 922(g). This law is still in effect.

When ACLU and ARC is against the rule, that should tell you that it's a bad rule.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»GOP Votes To End Obama Ru...