Alan Korwin, visit his website GunLaws.com.
“If it’s in the news and it’s about guns, it’s probably 100% wrong.” –Alan Korwin
The lamestream media told you:
“Is there someone who ran for office on the need to get guns into the hands of people who are literally too mentally ill to cash a check?” –Rachel Maddow (MSNBC) on Twitter
“The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to scrap regulations that require background checks for gun buyers with mental health issues.” –BBC article
“House votes to roll back Obama rule for background checks for gun ownership.” –AP headline
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The “news” media, in a typical anti-gun-rights frenzy, has gone off the rails in flat-out deception about a simple move by our new president to reestablish the rule of law.
Backstory: When you get old enough for social security payments, the system allows you to designate a “representative payee,” so your benefits (payment checks) can go to a third person you select. That person can deposit them and basically handle your finances, checkbook, bills and other matters for you, according to your instructions. It’s a common practice, making life easier. Typically, people select a spouse, child, accountant, lawyer or other trusted advisor.
The issue: Former president Hussein-Obama, whose middle name we’re not supposed to mention for reasons that remain unclear, especially since he steadfastly refuses to release the stack of documents that would clarify his pedigree far more significantly than the furor raised over the current president’s legally private tax returns, claimed that third-party payment plan revokes your Second Amendment rights. Experts agree it was an outrageous de facto illegal dictate from a decidedly anti-gun-rights office holder. B.H. Obama constantly denies his self-evident anti-rights position and acts.
According to Hussein-Obama shortly before leaving office in Dec. 2016, who instructed the Social Security Administration to act without an act of Congress — assigning a designated payee means you are “adjudicated as a mental defective.” That is a condition in federal gun statute that makes you “a prohibited possessor” (18 USC §922) banned from gun ownership. Assigning a payee however is not an adjudication, and says nothing about your mental state. It does say something about the former White House occupant’s mental state.
Tens of thousands of decent hard-working Americans on social security would have summarily lost their constitutional right to keep and bear arms under this stroke of a pen. Any arms they owned would have become contraband, subject to confiscation. Purchase of new ones, or ammunition, would have been forbidden. Their names were to be entered into the centralized federal “NICS” database of people whose gun rights have been lost.
Congress acted to rescind the illegal Obama abomination soon after president Trump took office, prompting the political left to go berserk. Locally, channel 12 (NBC News) interviewed me about the decision to rescind Obama’s order. The station used one fair sentence from a 20-minute videotaping, then ran a straw poll asking, “Should crazy people be allowed to have guns?” and got a 97% “No” response. It is unclear whether that is fake news, phony news, prejudice, fantasy or something else. A clip of the segment cannot be found on their website. Thanks to Chris Cox of the NRA who researched the media quotes used in this piece.
So uh, did the author actually read the law? It related to people who were receiving social security disability payments BECAUSE they were deemed mentally incompetent. It didn’t adjudicate people mentally incompetent for receiving disability payments through social security. I’m getting pretty damn tired of so called gun rights supporters making straw arguments. It undermines the legitimacy of proper second amendment support.
Zanshin – Please get your s–t straight. It was not disability payments that were in question. What was proposed was unilaterally denying 2nd amendment rights to ANYONE with a representative payee, ASSUMING they were mentally incompetent without due process being followed. My wife has a masters degree, but cannot balance a checkbook to save her life. Before I met her, she used to open a new account every year and start fresh. I am basically her rep. payee, which if official, would mean she could not own a firearm, clearly a violation of more than one of her civil rights.
Why are we still talking about Obama? Should we also reverse the law that he signed that allows guns in National Forest?
Maybe are still talking about Obama because the US is still living in the wake of his recent presidency.
Are you referring to Barack Hussein Obama, that was Barack Hussein Obama wasn’t it ?
Anyone named after a toilet shouldn’t make fun of another’s name.
probably still talking about obama to avoid the truth that trump sucked up to gun owners, bestowed upon them his most effusive and passionate words of solidarity and alliance, was happy to accept a golden treasure chest from the NRA, and hasn’t done squat on the gun front while devoting attention to foreign policy issues like NATO and bowing before muslim despots whose nations are the very cradles and ATMs of muslim extremism. and then there’s that chunk of our internet privacy he signed away. and all this after he ran on a domestic platform. both concealed carry reciprocity bills are rotting in subcommittees, with no indication he’s made any effort to move them along, when they’re relatively simple laws that republicans basically all agree on and know will score points back home in most districts.
BHO is a piece of dirt who also tried his best to disarm & enslave the American people. And guess what, the beige bozo failed!
You can’t seriously expect anyone willing to support the removal of rights to read. Words is are duh harderest. These people are responsible for the running of this nation. Sleep well with that thought.
I don’t generally advocate or wish for war or major catastrophes but this world really needs something major to remove a good portion of the population so that pressure is put on the survivors so that our collective energies can be focused on things other than baby proofing the world.
ADMINISTRATOR or Paul, Please fix your internet site security certificate. On initial home page opening and ever single article I open: I get and must acknowledge three consecutive pop ups that read “Could not establish secure connection”. Then when I try to back out after reading te page, I have to got through three of the same pop ups again before the site will change pages. As you can imagine, its a pain in the ass and really not worth the trouble to fight this problem on and on.
Thanks for your attention to this problem.
Will
Many problems with ‘secure connection” and “security certificates” have to do with having the improper date/time on your computer. Check the date/time on your computer and adjust if needed.
The other thing that can cause those is malware.