Feinstein: Vets aren’t competent with weapons
John Cornyn introduced an amendment to Feinstein’s scary black weapons ban that would exempt veterans from the ban like it does for law enforcement. Feinstein responded that PTS would preclude the possibility of that;
The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transfer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member or veteran and there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this.
[…]
I think we have to – if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally, don’t have access to this kind of weapon.
Maybe in Fenstein’s life PTS is new phenomenon, but the rest of us have been aware of it since the Civil War. Of course, Feinstein’s whole problem is that she didn’t think. I’m guessing that it’s new to her because she has never paid attention to events going on around her. And she took the opportunity to blame Bush for this “new phenomenon”.
The whole rest of the planet knows how a gun dealer would verify a veteran’s qualification for the exemption, except Feinstein. There are veterans with PTS in Afghanistan today who suffer from PTS and they’re walking around with their scary black rifles and doing their job. We could mention the fact that soldiers with PTS don’t often use those guns to harm themselves or others. Well, except in the media circus.
As Senator Cornyn points out in the video, veterans with mental problems are already excluded from gun purchases, anyway. But Feinstein doesn’t know that because it doesn’t much interest her that laws are already in effect in that regard, because she’s in too much of a hurry to “do something”. And, oh, by the way, it was the military that trained the police back in the 80s.
Thanks to Andy & Richard for the links.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
Knowing how poorly written most bills are before follow-on, ammending bills… Feinsteins’ bill would probably not exempt the cops who are vets… whoops.
[…] Jonn noted here one Senator is convinced that PTS(D) should preclude many vets from owning guns, but we may have a […]
But will veterans that “caught the PTSD” be allowed to purchase Pop Tarts?
[…] Diane Feinstein thinks Post Traumatic Stress is a new phenomena, a creation of the Iraq War. […]
@#53, yes, but only if they don’t chew the corners off to make it look like a gun.
I feel as though this entire situation illustrates the deep disdain that portions of our government have for the military and veterans in general. It’s like going to work every day and being pissed on by your boss. Of course if you were a civilian you could sue, but since your a soldier you just get to eat it.
We should hold a Pop-Tart weapons development contest. The weapon must be comprised of at least 75% Pop Tart (in any form) and the balance (up to 25%) of any other edibles. I shudder to think what the entries would look like.
At some point, DiFi is going to step on her own crank verbally. This asinine statement of hers may be the start.
I saw a new word applied to the moron in Florida who said we should just tell men not to rape women, instead of allowing women to practice their 2nd Amendment right to defends themselves. He called her a Dipshidiot. I am adopting that word as my own.
DiFi is a Dipshidiot!
FYI Colorado state senator hodges just made the same argument on the CO senate floor.
Yes, Senator Cornyn gets an Attaboy for speaking up in defense of vets in that your status as a vet does not mean you have a mental illness dx, but what Cornyn actually said about PTSD was;
“PTSD sufferers are already prohibited by law.”
This is incorrect. The diagnoses of PTSD/Depression etc. does not automatically make you a prohibited person no matter your veteran status . It is scary that Senator Cornyn does not know this and/or thinks that everyone with a PSTD dx should be a prohibited person. If he meant something different than what he said the Senator needs to speak up now.
Liz: that is an open question at present. Technically, you are correct. However, practice may be another matter entirely.
The VA appointing a financial conservator for a veteran to manage their fiances in and of itself also does not constitute a formal declaration of mental illness. However, the VA is reporting individuals for whom they’ve appointed a financial conservator to NICS as having been adjudged mentally incompetent or defective. This results in a de facto ban on the individual’s ability to lawfully purchase a firearm, and may well make continued ownership of an existing firearm by that individual unlawful as well.
Given that fact, it is not IMO overmuch of a stretch to think they might do the same with any diagnosis of psychological or psychiatric problems that in the opinion of some VA official warrants such. That precedent has already been established via the VA’s treatment of those veterans for whom the VA has appointed a financial conservator.
Given their declared anti-gun agenda, I do not trust many in our current government not to abuse any authority they have or can get to restrict lawful firearms ownership. And I have grave concerns that they will attempt to co-opt the medical profession into assisting them for “the public good”.
Why does no one rebut DDDifi’s claim,that ‘all vets have PTSD’, right to her face, in the legislature? The video of her speaking on the exemption amendment shows clearly that she can’t remember what she just read and has to keep referring to it, and her speech pattern suggests that she is in the beginning stages of short-term memory loss. She may not even remember what she said yesterday. 😉
Short-term memory loss: not a good sign in anyone. But she’s 80. Someone should tell her to retire.
Making a blanket statement about one population group demographic the way she did isn’t just insulting. It’s a form of defamation. It certainly does not apply to me or to other vets I’ve known in the past. Is she including WWWII and Korean War and Vietnam vets in this? What about vets from the Balkans? And the Gulf War?
The effrontery from that overpaid, dimwitted, ignorant, coiffured old sow is bad enough, but without a rebuttal from anyone, some people will think it’s cast in stone.
That fungus I mentioned earlier? She and these others who think like her are like that algae stain on the siding on the back of my house, where the sun can’t get to it. REALLY hard to get rid of, but with a lot of hard work, eventually, I do get rid of it.
@56: The reason there are portions of lawmakers and governmental types that have a deep disdain for Vets is because we think for ourselves, are not in lockstep with governmental control of everything in our lives, and we will question their actions and motivations. Plus, we adhere to, respect, and will protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That we are also disciplined and trained makes them nervous, because they don’t have positive control over us and the only way for them to get that is to attempt to de-fang us as much as they can. They see us as a threat to their aspirations to control the public and they don’t want us poisoning the well, so to speak, by speaking out to the public about it. So, DiFi is trying to forward the meme that we are mentally unstable and dangerous (she’s been re-watching 70’s and 80’s hollyweird movies with the crazy Vet meme, again) in order to marginalize us and our message.
My own personal view is this: Just leave us alone. We aren’t hurting anyone, we want to live in peace and just be left alone. We want to be able to protect ourselves and those around us. We don’t want or need the government telling us how we should be able to do so. We are your neighbors, your colleagues, your co-workers, your friends, and in some cases, your enemies. We are you. Our desires and goals are the same as yours; to raise a family if we so choose, to help in our communities, to just be ourselves. The only difference is; we gave ourselves to the government for a period of time, to do the bidding of said government, to protect all of you from the bad guys. When the government and our neighbors try to mess with us and our rights, that’s when we get uppity. We aren’t looking for a fight, but we aren’t going to back down when one comes knocking at the door. Just leave us alone.
#64 is me.
I really want to sue the pants off this coiffured, aging, frigid old cow, for defamation of character.
Hondo, that is exactly why I say it is scary. It is as though we have skipped ahead to all “PTSD sufferers are already prohibited by law” and in this case the source of this point of view was a Senator who is considered pro-gun rights and pro vet. I just wanted to bring attention to that because all the focus was on DiFi, who actually said and did nothing we didn’t already expect her to say or do. What Senator Cornyn said was the alarming part of the exchange.
As for the rest of it I agree with you. In fact, I don’t think it is a stretch- I seems to be the plan(checking my tin foil hat). It is possible the VA will not even be making the decisions if the label “mentally ill” is defined by legislators at the national level. Legislators who may believe “PTSD sufferers are already prohibited by law” or should be.
When word came down that we were going to have a ‘national conversation’ about the mentally ill and firearms we all knew the devil in the details was going to be who defines ‘mentally ill’.
Fortunately the issue of the VA automatically stripping Second Amendment rights from vets with conservatorship is slowly gaining attention through alternative media. Not fast enough, but it is happening.