Feds Say PTSD Vet Has to Turn in His Guns

LTC (Join to see) Had it exactly right.

"Competency" is a very wide category, and the DeptVA has A LOT of latitude regarding this. Unfortunately because they are BOTH a Medical Provider, and have Legal authority to Adjudicate someone "incompetent" this creates (what I believe) is a conflict of interest for the People. You have the Fox watching the Henhouse.

The People don't get appropriate levels of oversight when the Agency who is reviewing your case is also the one who is reviewing their own actions.

For any other medical provider, they would have to go an "outside" Judge to get a ruling, which allows the Citizen to effectively mount a defense on the "assessment." With the DeptVA, it starts out as a "ruling" and rather than an "even fight" it is an "uphill battle." There is something inherently wrong with that.

It's not that the VA is misusing it, it is that there is a problem with the law in the way it defines who is ineligible for gun ownership. One of the criteria that triggers this is when a person has been determined to be mentally incompetent. But it doesn't distinguish between those who are incompetent to manage certain personal affairs, such as finances, and thise who may be incompetent in terms of determining right from wrong, or prone to violent episodes, etc. almost all states have a mental incompetency aspect in their requirements to purchase or own a gun.

So the problem lies with the definition that lumps together those who may need someone to manage their personal affairs and those with other issues that properly should keep them from gun ownership. I think there has been some legislation introduced to address this issue, but am not sure what the status of it is. But this is not a case of any vet going in to seek treatment for PTSD getting caught up in this. The triggering mechanism has been when it gets entered into the database that the vet requires someone to be designated as their legal caretaker due to mental incompetence.

As a note, the VA has been doing this since the 1990s. It's not a new policy change related to any recent political activity.