Politico is reporting that a contentious gun policy rider attached to a spending bill has drawn the ire of Democrats and celebration of Republicans, with House Speaker Mike Johnson heralding it as a significant victory for his party. The rider in question is designed to protect the gun rights of military veterans who rely on Veterans Affairs (VA) assistance to manage their benefits, sparking heated debates on both sides of the aisle.
The controversy centers around concerns voiced by Democrats, particularly Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a vocal anti-gun proponent, who took to social media to express his opposition. Murphy criticized the provision for potentially enabling thousands of individuals, whom he described as “seriously mentally ill,” to purchase firearms annually. He deemed the inclusion of such a measure in the spending bill as “a death sentence for many” and chastised Democrats for yielding to Republican pressure on this issue. Democrats would have these veterans stripped of their right to own or possess firearms without due process in order to receive benefits.
An article in Roll Call cited Democrats’ concerns that all of these veterans who fall under this blanket are mentally defective, however, the rider wouldn’t simply green light the right to buy guns and ammo. Veterans who fall under this provision could at least have their case decided by a judge.
According to Roll Call:
The gun-related rider would change current law in place since 1993, under which veterans who are unable to manage their finances and benefits are reported to the Justice Department for a background check. Once the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System sees that individual has been deemed incompetent by the Department of Veterans Affairs, they are barred from purchasing guns and ammunition.
Instead, under the provision authored by House Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., in that chamber and backed by his Senate counterpart, Jon Tester, D-Mont., veterans seeking to buy firearms but unable to manage their finances could have their cases decided by a judge.
During a private House GOP conference, Speaker Johnson underscored the Democratic dissent against the gun policy rider as a triumph for the Republican party. He cited press reports and Democratic criticisms, which labeled the rider as the most significant regression in gun safety measures in over thirty years, highlighting the partisan rift the issue has exacerbated.
Notably, the gun rider had previously garnered support in the Senate, with several Democratic-aligned senators backing the measure, underscoring the complexity and divisiveness of the issue within Congress.
The debate intensified with Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) voicing their apprehensions. Frost, in particular, described the rider as “the greatest rollback of the background checks system since it was created,” indicating the profound concern among Democrats regarding its implications.
Despite these tensions, the spending bill does include a provision that both parties agreed on: a seven-year extension on the ban of so-called ghost guns.
I care more about illegal aliens than our veterans!!!
Said my demonrats. Said my no Americans!
I care more about illegal aliens than our veterans!!!
Said by demonrats. Said my no Americans!
Corrected: “by” not “my”
Do surrender monkeys monkey around before or after they surrender?
Thinking the answer is “yes”…
the spending bill does include a provision that both parties agreed on: a seven-year extension on the ban of so-called ghost guns.
There is no ban on PMFs. So how can it be extended?
See my comment below.
If the ability to manage a checkbook were the deciding criteria for mental competence, millions of Americans, from ages 10 to 100 would lose their 2A rights. Why do Democrats get to impose an effective poll tax on the Second, when the right to vote is no more, and no less, important than the Second? I hope every gun control representative at all levels of government choke on this bone!
All of congress would, no should be considered incompetent, for not being able to balance a budget
How is something that solely benefits those who get VA benefits a gun rights victory? It would be a victory if it was something that actually mattered, like the repeal of the NFA.
Social Security recipients who have someone else manage their finances are reported as well…
As I understand this it applies to VETERANS with MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES in the main.Hoevergivenmthat theMILITARY has on apercpital basis if we are to believe the Armed Force own statistics regarding Vetreans Mental Health Issues then perhaps it is ot unreasonable to require ALL veterans to have some kind of FITNESS evidence before they can own firearms Afternall in onemrecent case osf a mass shooting the perpetrator was a VETERAN and concerns had been raised by his NATIONALGUARD UNIT but they were unable to intervene in what is after all a due legal process undr the various PERSONAL DISCLOSURES acts
But what is interesting is that comparedtootherMIOLITARIES theUS Miolitary doesseem tosuuffer far moreMentalHealth issuesamong it’s Veterans than other militaries and overX4 times as much and longer lasting as for instance the UK under similar circumstances Fromwhay t weknow of theAMERICAN EXPERIENCE in Ukraine it’s even higher with by some measure 75% of Americans involved in Combat in Ukraine suffering from some degree of PTSD [over X20 the rate for Ukrainans]
.
and you need to stay in the UK. you do not understand what is happening here.
if a veteran goes to the VA and asks for help managing their finances (a VA program), the VA automatically codes them as, basically ‘incompetant’ due to mental illness. this is because Biden directed, indirectly, the left wing anti-gun administrator over the program to do so. this happens to thousands of veterans with no mental health issues at all, just need some help with their finances.
maybe you should have a ‘mental health fitness’ exam for no other reason than the government says so before you are allowed to exercise a right. I’m sure you would fail.
haven’t seen you around for a while, and the first thing you do when you show up is post your ignorance of the subject. How was the stay in the ‘Fruit Cake hotel’?
ALBERT the BRIT, First, you have no clue. But that is a foregone conclusion. Second, in this country is is against the law to discriminate against any person based on his military service. Your proposal that all vets be required to undergo to some mental exam to obtain a firearm which in this country is God given RIGHT! Third, what happens here in the US is none of your GD business. Go prevail on your Parlement to implement knife control…?
There wouldn’t be near the mental stress on returning vets if they hadn’t been not only allowed, but encouraged to take out terrorists and war criminals overseas, and then return back home and watch them plying their trade in congressional hearings – talk about absolute frustration.
I’ll bet alot of TVs had holes shot through them last night.
unicorn, I have to disagree with you. Combat is the MOST physically and mentally demanding activity known to man. Any solider, sailor, airman or Marine will tell you that. That the armed forces have been constrained by “political expediency” is a fact of life we have had to live with since VietNam. Every vet is effected one way or another serving in combat. And not just due to political expediency.
Waltr once again you know no of what you blather. I gew up in the post WorldWar !! era in CAlifornia. With one excetopn ALL my parent’s generation served or were somehow ative in the war effort. My Mom helped build warships in a shipyard. Dad served, all of his brothers. Overseas, in combat zones. One f his brothers was a sniper in the Pacific Theatre. the crew who systemaicallyband a great cost cleared the Japs ou of all he Pacific Islands starting in the Philippines. If you do the maths rightly you will then realise that my college age cohort were of draft age during LBJ’s crazy campaign to “get them there so we don’t have to get them here” madness. I won the draft lottery so did o get called up. I know dozens who did.
With only a few rare exceptions every one of those who served came back home in one piece, settled into civilian life, married, raised families….. got nd held good jobs and were normal. I knew more crazy hippie stoners who did NOT serve that had mental and =social “issues”. Some had guns, and I avoided them because they weren’t quite all there upstairs. To my knowledge none did anything worthy of front page news coverage. In truth, I am far more frightened over today’s public school “products” than I ever was in any time prior to this past decade. Perhaps mandating extra scrutiny for “mental issues” should be imposed upon graduates of our current government school systems. When one closely scrutinises that generation and what they have been dragged through, extra caution IS jusatified.
Would you support THATplan? Nah, didn’t think so. You seem to have a fetish about firarms. This is partly due to being Brit.. we this side the Puddle well remember you lot and your futile attempts to disarm us back in the mid-1700’s. Didn’t work then, win’t work now. Not so sure? Go and ask a chap named Thomas W Gage. He figured prominently in the process of we shucking off you lot back then.
Tonico, have you ever been in combat? And your spelling is atrocious. (putting it mildly). My father and his brother both served in WWII. I was raised in NYS on Long Island before I moved upstate. Sot what? Not only did I know “win” that lottery but I served in the USMC in Nam. I repeat: I have to disagree with you. Combat is the MOST physically and mentally demanding activity known to man. Any soldier, sailor, airman or Marine will tell you that. That the armed forces have been constrained by “political expediency” is a fact of life we have had to live with since VietNam. Every vet is effected one way or another serving in combat. And not just due to political expediency.
By the time I managed to sort out whatever the hell the alleged point of your unintelligible rant was actually trying to relate it was too late, there’s another 3/4 minutes of my life that I’ll never get back… I only hope you are not a prime example of the level of intellect in Britain… As for the actual intent of the post? I would suggest that you spend your time commenting on things that you actually understand although I do realize that would be placing a massive restriction on your comments but at least you would appear as less of a moron than you do here… OR, maybe put the Gin away and sober up before you attempt to communicate your ignorance to the rest of the world…
Geez, spellcheck doesn’t exist in your universe, or do you simply ignore all the suggested corrections?
I gave up on the post when the second paragraph proved even worse than everything before it.
I guess you never got the birthday card I sent you, I put $20 in it.
Anyway HAPPY BIRTHDAY Albert L J Hall 🎂 and many more. 🥰
This is an amusing hill to die on, they’re not even banning the idea that this is possible to do they’re just making sure that checks and balances that should have been in place in the first place are.
I remember in the late 2000s when the Democrats were against putting people on lists without due process being possible. Why the reversal?
Do not understand what the meaning of a 7 yr. extension of a ghost gun ban. How can you extend a law that doesn’t exist . Are they hoping that they get one from SCOTUS ?
Politico is full of morons and their drivel is unfortunately being regurgitated here. It is not a ban on “ghost guns” (for whatever the hell that term means). The subject being spoken about is the reauthorization of the 1988 Undetectable Firearms Act passed by congress and signed by Ronald Regan. One can go read all about it on Wikipedia. Instead of letting this moronic law die like the Clinton “assault weapon” ban, congress keeps extending it.
Got to keep those GLOCK 7s away from the Hans Grubers of the world.
As a veteran myself, if I were faced with the choice of my 2A rights or VA benefits; they can keep the benefits. What’s ironic is that most citizens enlisted in the military to protect our country, nation and the rights that God gave us.
VA benefits come in Very Handy if you end up needing 24/7/365 care……Monthly care cost is not more than your Social Security benefit in a VA facility. Private sector costs can run up to $17,000 Per Month if you are in a nursing home. Your VA benefits may well be your most valuable possession.
even a sane person needs help when trying to understand the craziness that is the VA system.
this is a feature of the VA, and certainly not a bug. There are minions who’s life mission is to make work for themselves and others, no accountability for their own “work product output” so they spend their days seeking how to confuse, complicate, obfuscate, bewilder, frustrate, delay, deny, lose paperwork, change papwerwork, etc. ThISE are the nutjobs that need special scrutiny when it comes to their possession of firearms.
If you have ever dealt with the iRS or SSA on any level deeper than normal filing of docs you might have an inkling of how insane those government agencies can be. I have een my sister, a CPA and a certified Court Reporter, tearing her hair out in frustration dealing with the IRS and SSA. Enough to make a cow eat meat.
Tyranical democRats want to take guns from everyone…excludes the guns used to protect them.
TRUMP 2024.
Remember, democrats believe all us veterans are potential domestic terrorists who will resist their extreme attempts to destroy this nation. They are afraid of vets and want us all disarmed.
It is a good fear.
I’ll buy and own what I want from anywhere I want! Come and take em MFs!