Not So Crazy Gun Owners Targeted By Obama Executive Action
Any American who wants to own a firearm must be crazy. As nonsensical as that premise sounds, it is the position which the federal government is leading us to in their effort to subvert our second amendment freedoms.
As an adjunct to creating as many felons as they can, removing their second amendment rights from that large group in the process, the government has also embarked on declarations of mental incompetence as a means through which to achieve non-offender citizen disarmament.
In January of this year, the Obama regime issued two executive actions, laying the groundwork towards this end. One is a DOJ interpretation that being “committed to a mental institution” can refer to either being involuntarily committed to inpatient or to outpatient psychiatric treatment.
The other cleared a path for HIPA circumvention in the reporting of “relevant information” for the purpose of reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Aside from the question of the legality of the president changing laws by means of a stated interpretation, there are concerns as to the resulting offenses the government will be able to conduct based upon the new guidelines. Chief among those is the restriction of a citizen’s right to bear arms.
The practice that has been effective for so many years of preventing persons with felony convictions, regardless of the nature of the crime, from owning a firearm will also work for those determined to be “crazy people.” If they subsequently violate the gun ownership restrictions, then the penalties are very severe and attach more foundation to remove what previously were that offenders rights.
In June of last year, what later became January’s executive actions, were proposed as a deeply embedded reinterpretation of the language of a planned change to the enforcement practices. The change affected DOJ and HHS and expanded the criteria for inclusion of additional persons into the ranks of the mentally unstable.
Under the new guidelines, as reported by WND, “the government would be told the details right away if anyone is sent to a mental institution for ‘mental defectiveness, or mental illness.’” But the plan didn’t stop there. It also included language which included persons “lodged in a mental facility ‘for other reasons.’” “For other reasons” is an extremely broad and vague identification. It could include anyone who ever resided in a mental facility as well as anyone, under the new January interpretations, who has ever been treated on an out-patient basis.
The “other reasons” caveat, might even be interpreted to remove the involuntary distinction as to the nature of the treatment supplied for background check data.
Perhaps the definition of a facility will be broadened as well to include AA or other non-traditional treatment methods or self-help groups.
With pediatricians and other physicians conducting gun ownership surveys of patients as well as similar activities in American schools, it’s not hard to see where this is all headed. Of course it is all presented under the guise of public safety.
The explosion of PTSD diagnoses, often a precondition of disability payments, has also exploded the ranks of those who can be labeled as “mentally ill” for the purposes of second amendment restrictions.
Anyone ever treated for depression, regardless of the conditions or events in their life at the time could potentially have a basis for the lifelong denial of their second amendment rights.
All of that supporting information the government needs is now theirs. NCIS and obamacare have made certain of that.
One thing is certain, we would be mentally ill to think that the Obama regime or similar totalitarian interests won’t use every tool at their disposal in the furtherance of their agenda.
Rick Wells is a conservative author who believes an adherence the U.S. Constitution would solve many of today’s problems. “Like” him on Facebook and “Follow” him on Twitter.
No comments:
Post a Comment