The Obama Administration announced two new executive orders on gun control Friday, after countless other attempts to erode Second Amendment rights failed to gain public support.
According to one of the proposed actions, patient privacy laws would be pushed aside to allow increased government access to mental health records. Currently required to protect that information, states would now be exempt, instead encouraged to submit a patient’s private records into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
A second proposal from the Department of Justice would “clarify” who is barred from owning firearms, which would include anyone involuntarily committed to an inpatient or outpatient mental institution. In an attempt to diminish concern, the administration claims that seeking help for mental issues does not prohibit a person from firearm ownership.
“The proposed rule will not change the fact that seeking help for mental health problems or getting treatment does not make someone legally prohibited from having a firearm,” the statement said.
Unfortunately, even without the executive orders currently applied, the government has already deceptively used this exact tactic to revoke legitimate gun ownership without due process, an issue that will undoubtedly increase.
In 2012, Afghanistan and Iraq veteran Brandon Raub had his firearms confiscated after being involuntarily detained for psychiatric questioning due to Facebook comments on government corruption. According to Raub’s lawyer John Whitehead, more than 20 others had recently been detained and declared mentally defective in the same Virginia county as well, with thousands more across the country.
That same year, David Sarti, best known for his appearance on National Geographic’s Doomsday Preppers, was committed to a psychiatric ward and deemed “mentally defective” after complaining to his doctor about chest pains. Declining to have tubes inserted into his heart by cardiologists, doctors claimed Sarti was suicidal, prompting the FBI to revoke his Second Amendment right.
The targeting of veterans specifically is quite clear. A collaborative study from 2007 between the VA Medical Center and the Archives of Internal Medicine claimed that at least 1/3rd of returning veterans were mentally ill.
With almost every human emotion now being labeled a mental illness by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the attack on gun rights through the medical system will only worsen.
An amendment in a 2012 defense bill spearheaded by Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer attempted to collect the names of veterans deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their finances. The list would then admittedly be handed over to the NICS, removing the gun rights of all listed veterans without due process.
Just last year, countless veterans began receiving a letter from the Veterans Administration warning that their mental health was suddenly under review. The letter continued by saying that the right to own weapons would be removed if bureaucrats deemed them “incompetent” outside of law.
Given the Obama Administration’s view toward returning military, the assault on veterans is unsurprising. In fact, a 2009 Homeland Security report labeled returning veterans as likely domestic terrorists. Despite the outrageous claim, former DHS chief Janet Napolitano defended the report. Incredibly, the DHS announced that Boy Scout Explorers were being trained to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” in a New York Times piece only one month later.
Despite the endless denials of gun confiscation, California residents were greeted by Justice Department agents last year as the state expanded its confiscation program. Lynette Phillips, who had been involuntarily held in a mental hospital after her nurse exaggerated the severity of her condition, had her and her husband’s firearms removed forcibly from their home.
Following the passage of the NY SAFE Act, New York residents began receiving letters telling them to turn in their firearms and permits as well. One legal gun owner had his firearms taken after a provision in the law allowed his medical records, which detailed his prescriptions, to be shared with authorities.
The media and administration’s failure to mention these countless abuses, justified through accessing mental health records, paints a clear picture of how these executive orders would be carried out. Masquerading as a mental health fix, the same system that has pushed dangerous prescription drugs for decades is now using it against law-abiding Americans.
In an ironic and telling move, a Pennsylvania court recently ruled that a state trooper who was previously hospitalized for depression would not be allowed to own a firearm “off-duty.” Regardless if the officer was an actual danger, the court ruled that due to his likely mental illness, he would only be allowed to carry a firearm “on duty,” showing how government is not subjected to the same rules as citizens.
Early last year, President Obama proposed 23 executive actions on gun control as well, pushing healthcare providers to ask their patients whether they own firearms. Given that law abiding gun owners are already being targeted over trivial medical conditions, the proposals would only increase their occurrence.
Despite gun homicide seeing a 49 percent drop since 1993, the establishment has continued to ignore facts with its attempt to push gun control.
The same Justice Department willing to give guns to drug cartels in order to justify gun control through Fast and Furious is now attempting to lecture the public on gun safety, unsurprising given Attorney General Eric Holder’s comments on “brainwashing” the public to be anti-gun.
With the attack on the Second Amendment already beginning this new year, will 2014 be the year of gun confiscation or the year of revival?
New Quinnipiac study stops gun-grabbers in their tracks
A study by Mark Gius, an economist at Quinnipiac University, shows states with restrictive concealed weapons laws had higher gun-related murder rates, and that assault weapons bans had no real impact on murder rates at the state level.
“These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level,” Gius wrote in his summary.
Results that will not be well received by gun control advocates.
Mossberg launches brand-new line of Duck Commander firearms
The study, published in “Applied Economics Letters,” set out to “determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state murder rates.”
Gius further summarized:
Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level.
“Specifically, the study shows that less restrictive concealed carry laws save lives, while gun control can endanger them,” AWR Hawkins wrote in a review for Breitbart News.
In response to critics, who claim that study’s abstract is insufficient to draw accurate conclusions, Hawkins pointed out that Breitbart News obtained the entire study, adding that “the more we read the more support we found for Gius’ claims.”
Hawkins is a military historian who holds a Ph.D. from Texas Tech University, and also contributes to Pajamas Media and Townhall.com.
Colo. Democrats blamed for $80M hit to economy by pushing out gun firm Magpul
DENVER — Democrats came under heavy criticism Friday for driving Magpul Industries out of Colorado by pushing an aggressive gun-control agenda, a move that could cost the state more than $80 million annually.
Republican state Rep. Lori Saine said she was “saddened to see this completely partisan law, widely considered unenforceable by sheriffs across Colorado, cause Magpul to leave our state.”
“The magazine ban did not garner one Republican vote in the House or Senate, and now as a result of this one-sided, Democrat-sponsored law, more than 200 people will lose their jobs and their ability to provide for their families,” said Ms. Saine in a statement. “[T]his move will cost the state of Colorado over $80 million a year in revenue.”
Officials at Magpul, which makes polymer firearms accessories, announced Thursday that the company will move its corporate headquarters to Texas and its manufacturing facility to Wyoming. Both are now based in Erie, Colo.
The relocation comes as a result of a measure signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper in March that limits ammunition-magazine capacity to 15 rounds. Magpul is among the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against the law.
Prior to the signing, Magpul officials told state officials that the company contributes more than $85 million annually to Colorado’s economy. The company employs 200 people and supports another 400 supply-chain jobs.
A year ago, the rapidly expanding firm was preparing to build a state-of-the-art facility in Broomfield, but pivoted after the gun-control bills gained steam. Magpul was founded in 1999 by CEO Richard Fitzpatrick in the basement of his home in Longmont, Colo.
The company plans to keep a small presence in Colorado in order to continue to fight the ammunition-magazine law.
“2013 began with Magpul planning expansion in Colorado, now 2014 begins with the announcement that Magpul will move 92 percent of its operation to Wyoming and Texas,” said Republican state Sen. Greg Brophy in a statement.
So far no Democratic lawmakers, including Mr. Hickenlooper, have commented publicly on Magpul’s decision to leave Colorado, although several Democrats have said that job growth is their top priority for 2014.
House Speaker Mark Ferrandino said at a press briefing Friday that he would not support a Republican-led effort to repeal the magazine law, adding he did not want to “rehash the same fights we had last year,” according to the Denver Post.
Senate Minority Leader Bill Cadman noted Friday that the three gun-control bills approved and signed in March were passed by the state legislature with no Republican votes.
“Democrats got what they wished for yesterday when Magpul Industries announced it would be leaving Colorado and taking over 200 jobs with them,” said Mr. Cadman in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that Democrats willingly chased a quality business like Magpul Industries out of Colorado for no reason other than petty politics. It’s even more unfortunate for the over 200 Coloradans who will be losing their jobs and falling behind on their bills as a direct result of irresponsible legislation from Democrats in Denver.”
The issue has already become fodder for this year’s gubernatorial race. Mr. Brophy and former Rep. Tom Tancredo, who are seeking the Republican nomination, blasted Mr. Hickenlooper for pushing Magpul out the door.
“This announcement is a stark reminder of the damage that this governor has done, and continues to do, to Colorado,” said Mr. Tancredo in a statement. “Hickenlooper gladly signed anti-gun legislation, with full knowledge that his actions would alienate and demonize law-abiding citizens, and job-creating businesses such as Magpul.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.