Can the VA prohibit you from owning a firearm?

CSM Mike Maynard — Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:04:17 -0400

See the attached letter that a friend of mine received. I honestly don't understand the scope/reach of the VA wrt firearms.

Has anyone else seen anything like this or know whether this is normal or authorized?

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 10 at 2014 11:25 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:25:41 -0400

If you are receiving benefits from the VA then they can.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2014 7:17 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:17:42 -0400

This is sickening. I have heard of several other instances like this but have never seen an actual letter. It's wrong on so many levels. The problem with the mental health aspect is they are applying it to personnel who are NOT any danger to anyone let alone themselves. The fact they use the "Brady Law" to infringe on others shows their true colors. The "law" (and I use that term very loosely) is a deliberate misnomer since there is no such thing as handgun violence.

Response by MAJ Dallas D. made Oct 29 at 2014 8:17 PM

MAJ Dallas D. — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:17:59 -0400

I have said for a while that the VA and or the federal government would use PTSD against veterans who want to own firearms. I am saddened to see that it has started.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2014 11:08 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:08:03 -0400

In November 1999, VBA provided NICS with an initial load of data on incompetent veterans, surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents from information in the Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) and the Fiduciary Beneficiary System (FBS). This consisted of data on 88,898 beneficiaries which were loaded into the NICS index.

The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (Brady Campaign) confirmed and instituted mandatory VA reporting requirements that the VA instituted in the 90s after the initial passing of the Brady Bill. There are currently 127,000-150,000 veterans(there's more actually) who have been denied 2nd amendment rights because they are deemed not mentally competent to handle their VA benefits and therefore assumed not competent to own/operate firearms and are AUTOMATICALLY listed to NICS. I would assume this action takes place only with VA medical/disability benefits, but could they extend that to all Veteran Benefits? GI Bill, homeloan, employment assistance, pension, survivor benefits, life/injury insurance?

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms drafted the regulations for NICS, the agency “defined the seven categories of individuals prohibited from purchasing or redeeming firearms.” BATF, the memo said, incorporated the Department of Veterans Affairs’ definition of incompetent — which says that “because of injury or disease [a person may] lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs” — into the “category of those adjudicated as a mental defective.”

Even if a person who was formerly judged to be mentally incompetent has had competency restored, they must still appeal to the denying agency,such as the FBI, or state or local law enforcement. This came out as a in-house Veterans Benefits Administration memo (VBA Fast Letter 00-44)

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2014 11:46 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:46:48 -0400

I am not surprised that the VA did this with this administration and their demagoguing this issue.

Response by SPC David S. made Oct 30 at 2014 11:39 AM

SPC David S. — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:39:31 -0400

Yes under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).

However if someone is placed on this list (yes there is a list) who feels otherwise can get a hearing, provide evidence, etc. and get their day in court to have their Second Amendment rights restored via due process.

Also a "determination of incompetency" can result in benefits being placed in guardianship.

These actions are done to mitigate the individual's ability to cause self harm or when the individual is incapacitated due to medical conditions. In the us 51% of all suicides are gun related, however removing the gun only changes this statistic as individuals in crisis will seek out other means. Maybe it's more about public safety than self harm.

How this law is executed I also do not know.

Response by SGT Allison Churchill made Oct 30 at 2014 11:53 AM

SGT Allison Churchill — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:53:11 -0400

Twenty-two veterans and/or service members kill themselves each day. Each day.

I'm sorry for your friend, CSM Maynard, but based strictly on the letter (and the mandatory suicide awareness training I had while in the Army) it sounds as if your friend is a threat to himself.

This is an opportunity for the VA to actually do something that could save this person's life. If he gets back on his feet and the VA won't take steps to remove him from the list, raise hell then.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2014 12:21 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:21:13 -0400

The Act referenced in the letter is federally mandated. The VA is not revoking his right to a firearm. They're referencing the act which revoked it.

Response by MSG David Johnson made Oct 30 at 2014 12:50 PM

MSG David Johnson — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:50:55 -0400

This is a very sticky situation that some just want to shy away from. The key sentence in that letter is that the individual was found not competent to manage his own finance. A VERY important sentence, I carry a gun and have the Utah permit which covers the most states and at the time I took the course it was the most strict of the courses. I also hold a permit from my home state.
Since I have a list of rated items I asked my psychologist about the VA and the firearm issue. I was told that I had nothing to worry about in my situation as I am competent to handle my own affairs.
You have to look at it this way, and this is just an example; Retired PVT Joe Snuffy was shot in the head during combat operations during OIF, his injury was such that the round only cracked his skull open, but didn't severely impair his ability to handle himself. He may have TBI, and PTSD, but he knows that he gets paid every month and he knows to pay his bills and can hold down a part time job that keeps him away from the public. Retired PVT Joe Snuffy probably wouldn't get a letter like the one in the original post.

Now, take his brother Retired PFC Jack Snuffy, he was also shot in the head, (Snuffy's can't keep their heads down). Now Jack was really messed up, his head was cracked open pretty good and there was some brain damage, he loses track of the days of the week, he can't remember any of his appointments, he can't hold down any type of job, when he gets his monthly check from the VA for a 100% rating Jack goes out to the bars and gets hammered every night, pays for drinks and basically spends all his money before bills are paid. On an appointment that he remembers to go to he makes a comment about always being evicted from his apartment because he keeps forgetting to pay the rent. His provider adds all these little tidbits of information into the case notes. Jack tries to get unemployability from the VA, he fills out all the required forms and waits for the backlog to get to his claim, and he gets a shock, he gets a letter like the one above. He can't handle his finances, how is he supposed to be responsibly enough to have weapons in his possession?

Now when you compare the brothers, they are night and day different in being able to handle responsibilities.
Now add in Fred Snuffy, and you guessed right, he was shot in the head too. Fred has a loving wife at home, Wilma, who works as Fred's caregiver even though she doesn't get paid to do this, she takes it upon herself. Fred and Wilma have a system down and it works for them, Wilma takes care of the finances, gets all the bills paid on time and budgets so they can go off for short vacations. Fred says that this is fine, he knows there are bills, he knows this because he and Wilma sat down and she showed him what needed to be done in case something happened to her.
When Fred and Wilma both go to all of Fred's appointments, the doctor's, nurses, and providers all see that Fred and Wilma have a system they have no reason to file for Fred's incompetency, so Fred gets to keep his arsenal of weapons, just in case of zombie attack he can loan some weapons to Jack.

These examples are stretching things and are over the top examples. I keep hearing "The sky is falling, The sky is falling" every time someone starts a rumor and it ends up spreading like wildfire without someone actually thinking, Hmmm, maybe I ought to check and see if what I've been hearing is true.
This is the first time I've actually seen a copy of the letter, and people are always asking if the VA has taken my license or my guns because of the meds I'm on and the rating I have.

The VA taking firearms away from those who are judged as not competent is on a case by case basis and doesn't mean that everyone with a PTSD rating is going to lose their privileges.

This is my humble opinion
Opinions are like asses, everyone has one and most smell funky.

Response by LCpl Clint Atkins made Oct 30 at 2014 12:49 PM

LCpl Clint Atkins — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:49:53 -0400

Let me start out by saying even though I am considered a veteran I don't know a lot about PTSD as I was 1171 "water boy" but to have your rights taken away by the same government that you put your life on the line for is very upsetting to me and I hope he fights and wins this outrageous action

Response by Cpl Anthony Pearson made Oct 30 at 2014 12:51 PM

Cpl Anthony Pearson — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:51:42 -0400

I cannot even BELIEVE what I just read...

THIS is going viral if it hasn't already. I am going to share with thousands of veterans that I know. HOW DARE THEY! Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

This nation of ours... it is unraveling at the seems.

Response by SPC Paul Prevost made Oct 30 at 2014 3:46 PM

SPC Paul Prevost — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:46:53 -0400

This is a classic example of why us Warfighters need to band together in our own organization and push for our Rights. Hence the Warfighters Rights Movement. We are growing and gaining strength of numbers but we still need senior NCO's and Officers to come on board and take up the fight for our Rights. We are not anti-war or anti-government, we are anti-discrimination and are preparing to fight in the courts and on capital hill as well as every State capital in the nation. We are currently operating via Social Media but our leadership is currently awaiting our 501c4 designation from the IRS and once that is finalized we will be able to truly make some progress on a national level.
https://www.facebook.com/WarfighterRightsMovement
http://vimeo.com/97268399
http://www.warfightermedia.com/

Warfighter Rights' Movement

Response by SPC Paul Prevost made Oct 30 at 2014 3:53 PM

SPC Paul Prevost — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:53:57 -0400

Here is the long and short of this subject. 1. yes anybody can be relieved of their weapons if they are judged to be mental incompetent, it has been this way for a long time. This requires a JUDGE to sign your rights away. 2. The VA is under the control of the Fed's. They are afraid of Veterans because we are a threat to their power structure and they will atack us in any way possible. It is illegal for them to take your guns without a court order but under the Obama Administration they obviously do not care about our Constitutional rights. 3. This is why I am working with the Warfighter Rights Movement, because I am tired of the government acting like they can treat us any way the want to. http://vimeo.com/97268399

Response by 1LT David Moeglein made Oct 31 at 2014 2:47 AM

1LT David Moeglein — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 02:47:22 -0400

CSM Mike Maynard, thanks for raising this issue. When doing mental health risk assessments at a community mental health organization in recent years, there was a place on the form to ask about weapons at home.

I recently had a friend whose sister killed herself with her pistol. She was a health care professional, and knew a number of ways to do this. People were mad at family members for giving the pistol back to her after a period of being depressed. It was probably not the best idea. However, if a person wants to commit suicide, and they keep trying, eventually they will be successful. There are a number of ways to do it.

I think the letter you posted is an excuse to crack down on gun owners that know how to use them.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 12:02 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:02:47 -0400

Tough subject. Tough crowd. Here's what I understand of the Brady Act and the VA. The VA, being a federal agency is required to enforce the relevant portions of the Brady act. The VA doesn't have the option if you are deemed incapable and at risk through examination (usually several exams), the VA has to enforce the Brady act. It's not the VA taking your weapons - it's the Brady act. There is an appeal / hearing that is an option. However, if you prove yourself to be capable and not at risk then you no longer qualify for assitance from the VA for your PTS.

As stated above, once you have successfully completed your treatment and then deemed capable and no longer a threat to yourself and/or others you can appeal the Brady act portion.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 1 at 2014 6:39 PM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 18:39:08 -0400

This is crap!

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 1 at 2014 9:08 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 21:08:07 -0400

I was at a VA appointment for followup on a renewed medical claim and one of the questions I was asked by the attending physician was, do I own any weapons. My reply was direct and to the point. "Doc, that's none of your damn business! Next question!"

Yet, I've had some that ask and some that don't! We know which ones have our best interest at heart! Be careful friends.

I've not personnally seen any of these letters, only seen and heard about someone else getting one over the internet.

Response by PO2 Wesley Wilson made Oct 26 at 2015 9:51 PM

PO2 Wesley Wilson — Mon, 26 Oct 2015 21:51:29 -0400

I have deen this before, basically what they are saying is because the person in question needs help with handling their money they are incompetent. Short answer is no he cannot be denied his 2a rights without due process. He needs a lawyer.

Response by SSG Ryan Yearicks made Apr 6 at 2016 11:34 AM

SSG Ryan Yearicks — Wed, 06 Apr 2016 11:34:29 -0400

The VA CANNOT say you cant have a weapon, unless you have been adjudged by a court to be unable to take care of yourself. THe VA cant make that decision on their own.

Response by SPC Jim Jilcott made Apr 6 at 2019 7:42 PM

SPC Jim Jilcott — Sat, 06 Apr 2019 19:42:13 -0400

I know every time I try to get them to up or change the medication for tinnitus the nurse assistant sends me to see the shrink. And when I do the shrink says why are the sending u to me. It’s a medical pribkem