Veterans Disarmament Bill: Amendments Proffered

[Pat McGarrity]

Veterans Disarmament Bill Could Come Before The Senate At Any Time
-- GOA provides Senators with several pro-gun amendments

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org


"Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of
Boston!" -- Patrick Henry, in his "Give Me Liberty or Give Me
Death"
speech of March 23, 1775

Wednesday, September 12, 2007


The Senate could bring up the Veterans Disarmament Bill at any time,
as a result of its passage in the Judiciary Committee a few weeks
ago. The bill -- introduced by F-rated Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and
Sen. Patrick Leahy -- is ready to come to the floor.

Gun Owners of America delivered draft amendments to every Senate
office yesterday, providing important changes that must be made to
the bill. Among others, the most important amendment would make it
clear that veterans suffering from PTSD are NOT prohibited persons,
and thus, are not to be denied the ability to purchase a firearm
simply because of emotional problems resulting from their service to
this country.

The Military Order of the Purple Heart is opposed to the
McCarthy-Leahy bill, having stated on June 18 of this year, that "For
the first time the legislation, if enacted, would statutorily impose
a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."

Military veterans are justifiably concerned that this bill will
legitimize the very thing that President Clinton did over seven years
ago, when his administration added 83,000 names of veterans --
suffering from maladies such as PTSD -- into the NICS background
check system.

Proponents of the bill argue that this bill gives veterans a
mechanism for getting their names off of the prohibited person list.
That's like giving a mugger access to your home, but then stating you
can hire a lawyer and pay THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of dollars to
eventually (maybe) get your stolen items back.

If the proponents are right -- that this bill will actually help gun
owners -- then surely they won't object to friendly amendments that
are designed to make it unmistakably clear that military veterans or
grownups who suffered with ADHD as children will never be denied the
ability to purchase a firearm, simply because they once had a
"determination" from an anti-gun shrink that said there was the
MINISCULE possibility that they could pose a danger to themselves or
others.

You can be sure that if the McCarthy-Leahy bill passes, it will just
be a first step. Consider some of the bigoted statements made by
celebrities and politicians which not only show their contempt for
gun owners but their pompous thinking which leads them to believe
that we are all crazy for wanting to own a gun:

* "I don't know that he's mentally qualified to own that gun." --
Democrat Presidential candidate Joe Biden, insulting a YouTube viewer
during a debate after the man referred to his semi-auto as his
"baby"
(July 25, 2007).

* "Isn't it possible that we all have that bit of insanity in us?
That's why I'm for gun control.... I don't really believe that a
human being who feels [things] should have the option [that is,
access to a gun] at their fingertips." -- Actress Jodie Foster,
quoted in a Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence press release
(August 20, 2007).

And then there're the studies which will be, no doubt, used by
liberal anti-gunners to strip away the gun rights from more and more
law-abiding citizens, using the pretext that a shrink's diagnosis
proves these people shouldn't own guns:

* "A quarter of the Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans treated with US
government-funded health care have been diagnosed with a mental
disorder, according to a study published Monday." -- AFP news (March
12, 2007)

* "The number of American children and adolescents treated for
bipolar disorder increased 40-fold from 1994 to 2003, researchers
report today in the most comprehensive study of the controversial
diagnosis. Experts say the number has almost certainly risen further
since 2003." -- New York Times (September 4, 2007)

Even before the studies started rolling in, gun haters were already
working the legal loopholes as best they could. When the Veterans
Administration got caught adding veterans' names into the NICS system
during the Clinton presidency, they defended their actions by saying
it was "required by law" -- a statement which was just flat out
false.

But it's notable to hear what a spokesman for the VA said in an
interview with WoldNetDaily (June 27, 2000). He said the most common
way of finding a veteran "incompetent" is when he or she receives a
formal rating of incompetency from a VA panel of medical
representatives or from "a duly authorized VA medical center,
government agency, or even a PRIVATE PHYSICIAN." (Emphasis added.)

That's what HR 2640 is all about. McCarthy and Leahy (and others
like Sen. Chuck Schumer) are forging the legal chains that will be
used to keep hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of decent,
law-abiding Americans from owning guns... not because of what a court
rules, but because of what ONE INDIVIDUAL says.

Over two hundred years ago, Patrick Henry warned about the "chains"
that were being forged to enslave them. If he were here today, would
he not warn us again?

Thankfully, there are many of you who are sounding the alarm. State
groups from all over the nation are pumping out alerts to supplement
what GOA is doing at the national level. Just yesterday, the New
Hampshire Firearms Coalition (NHFC) called its members to action,
stating that HR 2640 is a Trojan Horse, which sounds justified on the
outside with promises of keeping "mental defectives" from having
firearms. But when one takes a closer look at the details of the
bill, the group said, it reveals "a huge expansion in those who will
become a prohibited person; an expansion that could potentially
include most Americans."

In addition to pointing out how many shrinks could prohibit average
Americans from owning guns, NHFC points out that many pediatricians
could make similar anti-gun "determinations" (using the language of
the bill) to disarm their patients -- since after all, these docs
believe that "any household with firearms is 'dangerous,' even if
they are properly stored."

Good point.

ACTION:

1. Stay informed. GOA has a mammoth section on our website which
both gives the specifics of the Veterans Disarmament Act and answers
the claims made by supporters of the bill. Please go to
http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm to get more information, including
the proposed GOA amendments that were delivered to each Senator on
Tuesday.

2. Alert others. Forward this alert to pro-gun friends and family
and ask them to take action as well.

3. Take action. Please contact your Senators, even if you have
already done so. You can use the pre-written message below and send
it as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm (where phone and fax numbers
are also available).

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

I oppose the Veterans Disarmament Act, which is being pushed by Rep.
Carolyn McCarthy (HR 2640) and Sen. Patrick Leahy. This bill will
expand the 1993 Brady Law and disarm hundreds of thousands of combat
veterans, among others.

I understand that Gun Owners of America distributed several
amendments yesterday to every senatorial office to address the
mistaken arguments that supporters of the bill have. I also
understand that proponents of this bill are claiming it will actually
help gun owners.

They argue that this bill gives veterans a mechanism for getting
their names off of the prohibited person list. That's like giving a
mugger access to your home, but then stating you can hire a lawyer
and pay thousands upon thousands of dollars to eventually (maybe) get
your stolen items back.

Well, if the proponents are right -- that this bill will actually
help gun owners -- then surely they won't object to friendly
amendments that are designed to make it unmistakably clear that
military veterans or grownups who suffered with ADHD as children will
never be denied the ability to purchase a firearm, simply because
they once had a "determination" from an anti-gun shrink that said
there was the MINISCULE possibility that they could pose a danger to
themselves or others. That is what the GOA amendments are designed
to do.

I still believe that the Brady Law has done more to register gun
owners and deny guns from of law-abiding Americans than to keep guns
out of criminals' hands. But adopting these amendments will at least
prevent an anti-gun administration from doing what the Clintons did
in 2000 when the Veterans Administration added the names of some
83,000 veterans into the NICS system.

Sincerely,


****************************

Support The Second Amendment Every Time You Call Long Distance

Many major phone companies donate to anti-gun politicians and
organizations. Thankfully, not all of them. FreedomFirstTelecomm is a
solid and dependable long distance company. Now, they have agreed to
donate an incredible 20% of your monthly long distance bill to GOA!

What's more, they offer a great and competitive deal for the
consumer. Features include a low 3.9 cents per minute interstate
rate, six-second billing, no term contracts to sign, no monthly fees,
no minimum usage requirements, and no hidden charges or gimmicks.

Please consider stopping by http://www.gunowners.org/ffld.htm to
check out the offer and sign up today.

****************************

Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will
bounce back as undeliverable.

To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail
address may also be made at that location.