Gun Rights

Obama Administration Thinks People on Social Security Who Have Others Handling Their Finances Shouldn't Have Guns

And a federal court continues to violate handgun sellers' First Amendment rights in California

|

As part of the Obama administration's post-Newtown school mass gun murder attempts to toughen background check laws and make sure the "wrong people" don't have guns (although a move that has less than zero to do with any possibility of anyone becoming a mass public murderer a la Newtown), the government wants to link the Social Security administration to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The administration hopes to prevent anyone receiving Social Security who has others handling their finances or affairs from legally owning a gun.

Details and opposition reported in the Los Angeles Times:

A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease."

There is no simple way to identify that group, but a strategy used by the Department of Veterans Affairs since the creation of the background check system is reporting anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary.

If Social Security, which has never participated in the background check system, uses the same standard as the VA, millions of its beneficiaries would be affected. About 4.2 million adults receive monthly benefits that are managed by "representative payees."

Can we have a moment of sanity on this?

"Someone can be incapable of managing their funds but not be dangerous, violent or unsafe," said Dr. Marc Rosen, a Yale psychiatrist who has studied how veterans with mental health problems manage their money. "They are very different determinations."

The story goes on to detail with anecdote and data how the Veterans Administration has already been pulled into enforcing NICS.

The VA reports names under a category in gun control regulations known as "adjudicated as a mental defective," terminology that derives from decades-old laws. Its only criterion is whether somebody has been appointed a fiduciary….the category…includes anybody found by a "court, board, commission or other lawful authority" to be lacking "the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs" for a wide variety of reasons…

Rosen, the Yale psychiatrist, said some veterans may avoid seeking help for mental health problems out of fear that they would be required to give up their guns…..

About 2.7 million people are now receiving disability payments from Social Security for mental health problems, a potentially higher risk category for gun ownership. An addition 1.5 million have their finances handled by others for a variety of reasons.

The agency has been drafting its policy outside of public view.

Of course it has been.

All hope for continued ability to keep their possessions would not be lost for Social Security recipients caught in this new web. But, well, most hope would be:

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.

But as of April, just nine of 298 appeals have been granted, according to data provided by the VA. Thirteen others were pending, and 44 were withdrawn after the VA overturned its determination of financial incompetence.

And opponents of gun registration are often written off as paranoid loons for thinking that once the government knows you have a gun, they might try to come up with a reason to take it away.

Hat tip: Ken Costantino

In other gun law news out of California, a judge declined to place a preliminary injunction in an ongoing federal suit, Tracy Rifle and Pistol v. Harris, against a California law that bars sellers of handguns from, as the law states:

No handgun or imitation handgun, or placard advertising the sale or other transfer thereof, shall be displayed in any part of the premises where it can readily be seen from the outside.

The injunction against enforcement of the law has been denied by a federal district court in California, though the law is a clear First Amendment violation and utterly pointless to boot if barring obvious images of guns to lure in unsuspecting would-be purchasers is meant to prevent careless and thoughtless impulse buys of weapons, since the state has a 10 day waiting period on gun purchases anyway.

What was the reasoning? Basically, well, guns are bad, OK?

As the judge wrote, quoted by Eugene Volokh at the Washington Post blog Volokh Conspiracy:

The costs of being mistaken, on the issue of whether the injunction would have a detrimental effect on handgun crime, violence, and suicide, would be grave. …. By contrast, the cost of continued compliance with section 26820 during the pendency of this lawsuit appears to render little harm to Plaintiffs, outside of the inherent harm imposed by a violation of their First Amendment Rights. With due consideration to the serious First Amendment questions raised by Plaintiffs, and their likelihood of success on the merits, the implications of being mistaken in this case indicate it is in the public interest to deny the injunction…


Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

39 responses to “Obama Administration Thinks People on Social Security Who Have Others Handling Their Finances Shouldn't Have Guns

  1. Good morning, Brian. Insomnia?

  2. Social security have to be taken by the government itself, not by sanctioning personal guns. People will misuse the weapons and most of them haven’t aware of the rules and regulations of using guns.

    1. I’d like to hire you at once to ghost write my dissertation.

      1. D’s get degrees.

      2. LMFAO

      3. Please to be sending credit card number.

        /D H

    2. rules and regulations of using guns

      Very simple. Treat ALL firearms as if they are loaded. Do not ever point one at something you are not willing to destroy. And keep your finger off of the trigger unless you are pulling said trigger.

    3. Is that you, Barry?

  3. I just love that libertarians and those on the right look at this action by the leftists and just shrug and think “Oh, well there they go again…”, but it should really be a wake up call. There is NOTHING these statists FUCKS won’t do, no way in which they won’t dissemble and connive, to deprive you of your naturally endowed rights – whether they be expression, speech or self-defense. They absolutely cannot tolerate it, so when the people say “No, we have the right to be safe in our persons and homes”, they fucktard elitists say “Well, we know better than you, and we are going to do an end-run around your rights..” and they do it shamelessly and relentlessly and NO ONE ever calls them on it. This is exactly why I keep stockpiling – because statists will NEVER stop.

    1. Obligatory:
      Listen, and understand. That gun-grabber is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are disarmed and helpless against the government.

  4. “Someone can be incapable of managing their funds but not be dangerous, violent or unsafe,”

    My grandfather is neither dangerous, nor violent, nor unsafe, nor someone who should be allowed to have a gun. He’s a very confused old man. I don’t see the problem with this, in abstract (I’m sure there will be problems with specific individuals)

    1. I’m just gonna call it age discrimination. There are plenty of people on SS, who have sharp minds and can reasonably handle themselves. They didn’t get old by being stupid and sticking forks in toasters.

      While there is a tendency for old people to go senile, there’s also tendency for teenagers to suffer from schizophrenia and depression. It makes just as much sense when it comes to handling guns.

      1. Ahem, I mean it makes just as much sense to ban teenagers and 20 year olds from having guns. An 80 year old grandma probably isn’t about to pull the trigger on a shotgun with her toe.

      2. While there is a tendency for old people to go senile, there’s also tendency for teenagers to suffer from schizophrenia and depression. It makes just as much sense when it comes to handling guns.

        Haven’t you seen the news? There are senile mobs rampaging through the cities shooting them up

        1. Oh, darnit, then lets just ban them for everyone, if we are gonna do it for seniors and teenagers. Lot of adults are reckless. We can agree on that, yah?

          “I don’t see the problem with this, in abstract…”

          Yah, that is what the left is counting on. You do like the smell of almonds, right?

          1. I actually prefer to keep a shotgun handy as protection from Hell’s Grannies.

        2. The po-po?

      3. There are plenty of people on SS, who have sharp minds and can reasonably handle themselves

        Yes, and those aren’t the people incompetent to care for themselves, which is what we were talking about. Is the problem here just reading comprehension?

        1. No, the problem is creeping incrementalism that will be WILDLY misapplied (as policy). Today, you are incompetent to care for yourself because you have someone else handle your finances. Two weeks from now, you will be adjudicated as incompetent because you drink too much chocolate milk and that is unhealthy. And thus you must be disarmed.

          Speaking of reading comprehension, are you being willfully obtuse?

    2. nor someone who should be allowed to have a gun

      So take it away from him. What does the government have to do with it? If you think it’s a good idea, carry it out yourself. You are his relative, unlike whomever the government might send.

      I don’t see the problem with this, in abstract

      Even setting aside that there is no such exception written into the 2nd Amendment that allows this, the government will expand the definition of mentally incompetent and will regardless of any initial statements to the contrary start getting forceful about confiscating these weapons. Moreover, such confiscation would constitute a taking and thus need to be compensated. That we would allow eminent domain to encroach into personal (vs real) property should be truly frightening.

      I’m sure there will be problems with specific individuals

      A lot of people don’t take kindly to the stripping of their rights, whether they pass government mental standards or not. That you consider them just speedbumps on the road to utopia is disconcerting to say the least.

  5. Hat tip: Ken Costantino

    Oh, that’s low.

  6. With due consideration to the serious First Amendment questions raised by Plaintiffs…

    Apparently not.

  7. Florida Man-still trying to explain away bad driving

    http://www.abcactionnews.com/n…..picks=true

  8. So, going by the standard that not being able to handle finances means not being able to handle a firearm…the Feds will be disarming any day now, right?

    1. + 1 trillion dollar deficit

  9. I was talking to person about this and mentioned that someone with dementia (mostl likely group affected) is unlikely to go on a killing spree. This overly earnest progressive (aren’t they all) says oh no that is not the problem, they might commit suicide! So I laugh, and ask do you support assisted suicide? Guess their answer.

    So progressives don’t even support committing suicide with state approval, paper work and a doctors OK.

    1. You shouldn’t do anything without state approval and assistance.

    2. Well, yeah. You aren’t free unless you’re asking permission and obeying orders.

      That’s the progressive paradox. They don’t trust anyone to make their own decisions because people are too stupid or too greedy or too callous or too self-interested, but once a person joins government they become some angel who is incapable of any of those things.

      1. Well, of course. Top Men work for government, therefore government is Top Men. And Top Men are the only humans capable of squelching that bad human nature.

  10. No handgun or imitation handgun, or placard advertising the sale or other transfer thereof, shall be displayed in any part of the premises where it can readily be seen from the outside.

    And don’t even *think* of advertising on the internet!

    Seriously, anyone involved in the implementation of this law should immediately be terminated fired axed — they should lose their job.

  11. The administration hopes to prevent anyone receiving Social Security who has others handling their finances or affairs from legally owning a gun.

    Something something shall not be infringed.

    1. uses the same standard as the VA

      The gov’t literally trains people to use guns and then wants to deny them the use of guns.

      1. They’re only allowed to use guns when in service of their masters. Once they are no longer in service, they give up their right to self defense.

    2. One more click of the ratchet.

  12. But as the violation began in USA, weapons and arm are banned to keep in public. Obama administration is working on changing the law to keep arms.

  13. If you are a student, who work during the university, or you just don’t have time for writing you papers, coursework, thesis or dissertation. Try our service dissertationroom.co.uk We have proffesional writers and cheap prices. Welcome to our site!

  14. The academic students need to complete a dissertation, Thesis or research paper works according to their academic schedule. If you need any help to complete your assignment works, visit custom thesis writing service. We have expert thesis writers. We offer our best services at affordable prices. Let’s enjoy your academic life!

  15. Thesis is an unavoidable task in academic schedule. It has a complex structure, because of this reason many students approach best thesis writing service for completing their thesis works. Now there are many online services available. All services are available at affordable prices. Best thesis writing service is the best service for students.

  16. To reduce the assignment load of the students, most of the students want to avail the best thesis writing service

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.