Gun control

The fight over the Second Amendment and gun rights in America probably hasn’t been more intense in the last 10 years than it is right now, in the wake of a Muslim using a rifle and a handgun to kill at least 49 people at a “gay” bar in Florida over the weekend.

And coincidentally, Gun Owners of America is noting that right now, Americans have an opportunity to sound off to their own government about Barack Obama’s newest gun restriction proposal.

“Barack Obama understands it is the Second Amendment community that has destroyed his legacy,” the organization explains. “And now, like a rabid dog, he is lashing out in an effort to destroy as many law-abiding gun owners as possible.”

His newest plan would be to abruptly take Second Amendment rights away from a vast class of Social Security and government benefit recipients – anyone with help managing their government benefits and a wide range of other individuals.

The change would make it a crime, instantly, for those individuals to have guns.

The biblical mandate for armed self-defense – especially in church! Get “Shooting Back” today!

“The regulation promises to aggressively search for and take away the gun rights of Social Security Disability recipients with PTSB, ADHD, post partem depression, Alzheimer’s, etc.,” the report said.

The group has posted online instructions about how to go to the government’s regulations website and submit your comments.

“The bottom line is that Barack Obama now proposes to turn hundreds of thousands of law-abiding senior citizens into instant felons, subject to fifteen year jail terms,” the organization explained. “Obama concedes that ‘75,000’ seniors would be turned into felons, but anyone who thinks the impact of this proposal can be contained at 75,000 grandmas and grandpas may want to remember Obama’s ‘You can keep your doctor’ track record of veracity.”

The report said, “Even the Los Angeles Times last year suggested the figure could be as high as four million seniors.”

Gun Owners reports that there is an option to dispute the government’s decision to withdraw Second Amendment rights on a case-by-case basis, but it could cost an individual “at least $10,000.”

“You probably don’t know this and probably don’t care: But octogenarians are not a high-crime demographic. Very large numbers of them have firearms which they intend to pass on to their children, however,” the report said.

The Los Angeles Times had reported earlier the Obama administration is pushing to ban Social Security beneficiaries from owning guns if they “lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs.”

That is a virtual copy of a Veterans Administration plan, as WND has reported, being used against military veterans by the Obama administration.

Michael Connelly of the United States Justice Foundation has been working on the VA case since several veterans contacted him to say they had been determined incompetent without a hearing and wanted to fight back.

According to the Social Security plan, the federal benefit recipients would be told they are incompetent and can no longer have weapons. Their names would be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check system, which is used by governments to keep weapons out of the hands of felons, drug addicts, illegal aliens and others.

An estimated 4.2 million adults get Social Security payments that are managed by “representative payees,” and for a wide range of reasons.

The Times said the move is part of an effort launched by the Obama administration after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, to strengthen gun control.

After Congress shot down virtually every legislative change Obama wanted, the president began to makes changes through rewriting rules and definitions.

Connelly had told WND that if the government is successful in its restrictions on Social Security recipients, there will be other targets soon.

“They could go after student loan recipients. What about people getting food stamps? Medicaid? Potentially anybody working for any government contractor,” he warned.

He said he’s been warning on his blog since that the Social Security move was coming.

He said the government was using veterans “as guinea pigs to develop methods that can be used to steal their constitutional rights.”

“Veterans get the letter from the VA telling them that because of physical or mental disabilities they are going to be declared incompetent to handle their own financial affairs, and the VA will appoint a fiduciary for them. The veterans are given 60 days to prove they are competent, which is a direct violation of the due process clause of the Constitution that requires the burden of proof be on the government,” he wrote.

“In none of the cases that we know of has there been an adjudication process with a hearing before a judge or an administrative judge. Nor have the veterans in most cases been examined by a psychiatrist, psychologist or even an MD,” he continued. “[Then Attorney General]-Eric Holder decided that anyone who works for the VA can declare veterans incompetent for any reason including having their bills paid automatically out of their bank accounts.”

WND broke the story that the Obama administration insisted it was routine for officials to send out letters informing veterans that an unidentified “report” indicated they may be declared incompetent and consequently stripped of their Second Amendment rights.

It’s the same administration that in 2009 warned that “returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists.”

The 2009 report from the Department of Homeland Security was called “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” It also said Obama’s governmental managers were “concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.”

The biblical mandate for armed self-defense – especially in church! Get “Shooting Back” today!


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.