Survivalist Forum banner

Gun Owners Group Condemns "Treacherous" Passage Of Anti-Second Amendment Legislation

3K views 20 replies 19 participants last post by  mongoose 
#1 ·
Gun Owners Group Condemns "Treacherous" Passage Of Anti-Second Amendment Legislation

http://infowars.net/articles/december2007/211207Zelman.htm

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, Dec 21, 2007







Gun owners and second amendment rights groups have condemned the passage by Congress yesterday of legislation that re-writes the law in order to regulate gun ownership.

Alex Jones was joined on air yesterday by Aaron Zelman, Executive Director of the pro second amendment group Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, to discuss the passing by Congress of the "NICS Improvement Act"

Opponents have dubbed the bill, the "veterans disarmament act" as it will place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the federal gun ban list.

The bill, HR 2640, passed in the House in June and was later passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee both times without a recorded vote. Gun owners have been trying to raise awareness and beat down the legislation ever since.

The bill, sponsored by outspoken anti-second amendment representatives Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), also applies to anyone who has been diagnosed with ADHD as a child and to anyone who develops Alzheimer's. Gun owners fear that in time the diagnosis of any kind of mental affliction could end with rights being stripped.

"This was a combined effort between the NRA and Carolyn McCarthy and Charlie Schumer, to appear to be doing something good, but in reality it brings about a great deal of evil." Aaron Zelman commented on the Alex Jones show.

(Article continues below)


"One example that has really concerned me for many months since this bill was introduced, I haven't seen a clear definition of what a mental health problem is, does that mean somebody who was depressed for a week if there was a death in the family? They got a few pills from their doctor or does it mean something much more severe?" Zelman continued.

The legislation is another case that hinges on the government's incessant creation of psychological profiles for everything that are then used to categorize people and accordingly strip rights.

Section 102((1)©(iv) in HR 2640 provides for dumping raw medical records into the system which will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.

The bill radically redefines key legal terms to allow gun ownership rights to be stripped on the findings of a psychiatric diagnosis, where in the past gun rights could only be withdrawn through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court with the protections of due process.

"This really opens a door for the ATF, to come smashing the door down actually in your home because lets say you owned guns prior to someone saying you have a mental health issue, well that means you can't keep the guns you have. So this will give a whole new emphasis to ATF to justify their budget and their thuggery." Zelman stressed during yesterday's interview.

"This bill is treachery on behalf of the NRA and the usual group of gun haters. it should be a red flag to everybody who is listening to your program that the battle to destroy the second amendment has started. The war on guns is in full force." Zelman continued.

The legislation also mirrors policy of Bill Clinton's administration over seven years ago when some 83,000 veterans were illegitimately added into the National Criminal Information System (NICS system) -- prohibiting them from purchasing firearms, simply because of afflictions like PTSD.

Section 101(c)(1)(C) of HR 2640 would rubber-stamp those illegal actions. Over 140,000 law-abiding veterans would be statutorily barred from possessing firearms.

Furthermore, the legislation passed the Senate and the House on a voice vote, meaning there is no record of who voted for it. The bill will now go to the President's desk

The veterans disarmament act is tantamount to declaring the fear of an authoritarian government, the cornerstone of the second amendment, a mental illness. Once again we are witnessing another all out attack on the basic founding principles of the American Republic.

"The supreme court may say yes you have a right to gun ownership but the government has a right to regulate. That regulation could also include taxation. The battle is on and anyone who thinks, well no, we're gonna win the day and things are going to turn out OK, they need to take an anti-Naive pill." Zelman urged yesterday.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership's website has more information and advice on what action can be taken to combat the legislation

"As we have shown people in our film, innocents betrayed, when governments take guns they are able to demonize a group of people, they are abe to determine whether that group of people will live or die, and they are able to control the entire society because no one can resist effectively." Zelman concluded.

Listen to the full interview with Aaron Zelman here.

end of article.

The reader may have to go to the link above and cloick on the word HERE in order to listen to the interview with Aaron Zelman.
 
See less See more
#4 ·
I agree and "its to late" isn't to far off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 411man
#3 ·
In order to further control you (and believe me, they are controlling you in many ways whether or not you understand that - through taxes, laws, fear, checkpoints in airports, "patriot" act etc etc) they need to take away the ability of the common masses to defend themselves.

Thomas Jefferson knew what he was talking about when he said that guns keep people free.
 
#6 ·
"This really opens a door for the ATF, to come smashing the door down actually in your home..
Oh, horse manure. They don't have enough ATF agents to prosecute real crimes. What makes anyone think they're going to have enough people to confiscate people's guns for no reason? Good grief.

tantamount to declaring the fear of an authoritarian government, the cornerstone of the second amendment, a mental illness.
Oh, paleeeeeese!!

"The supreme court may say yes you have a right to gun ownership but the government has a right to regulate.
In this day and age that is good.

Over 140,000 law-abiding veterans would be statutorily barred from possessing firearms.
That doesn't sound like very many people to me. They can't pursue a normal, happy life without owning a gun? If a person has a mental disorder the last thing they need is a gun. If the day ever comes that the taliban come screaming across the Ambassador Bridge the government can then give the 140,000 vets with PTSD a special permit to buy a gun.

also applies to anyone who has been diagnosed with ADHD as a child and to anyone who develops Alzheimer's.
Good.

"One example that has really concerned me for many months since this bill was introduced, I haven't seen a clear definition of what a mental health problem is, does that mean somebody who was depressed for a week if there was a death in the family? They got a few pills from their doctor or does it mean something much more severe?" Zelman continued.
I do see this as a valid point. However, it looks to me like that is being specifically addressed as it should be.

I see this as a move toward keeping guns in the hands of stable citizens. As far as the vets go, if enough time passes and it's clear that PTSD does not contribute to unstable or violent behavior the law can always be modified again. But, for now, I don't feel less safe with such a law in place. JMO.
 
#11 ·
Oh, horse manure. They don't have enough ATF agents to prosecute real crimes. What makes anyone think they're going to have enough people to confiscate people's guns for no reason? Good grief.


Oh, paleeeeeese!!


In this day and age that is good.


That doesn't sound like very many people to me. They can't pursue a normal, happy life without owning a gun? If a person has a mental disorder the last thing they need is a gun. If the day ever comes that the taliban come screaming across the Ambassador Bridge the government can then give the 140,000 vets with PTSD a special permit to buy a gun.


Good.


I do see this as a valid point. However, it looks to me like that is being specifically addressed as it should be.

I see this as a move toward keeping guns in the hands of stable citizens. As far as the vets go, if enough time passes and it's clear that PTSD does not contribute to unstable or violent behavior the law can always be modified again. But, for now, I don't feel less safe with such a law in place. JMO.
When I look up domestic enemy in the dictionary I see the faces of those who think this is a good idea and don't have a clue to what is going on . I bet you most people don't have a clue how many ATF folks are out there and what they actually do.
The NRA has again comprimised there principles (and ours as well) to smooth over some BS get along scheme.The goverment will take any route and tactic to get guns out of the hands of everyone, just look around the world there has never been good come from gun control any where.
 
#7 ·
Makes me wonder exactly how many veterans who genuinely suffer from PTSD will not seek treatment for their condition since it will automatically strip them of their ability to defend themselves regardless of the severity of their affliction.
 
#9 ·
the real problem with this BAD legislation is it will affect all the people who are *misdiagnosed* with ADHD/ADD/PTSD... You could have a kid who is hypoer on sugar get diagnosed with ADHD and BAM! no guns for them. Are we kidding here?

Also, the mechanisms for removal from the database of people who are misdiagnosed or are later "cured" of said condition is weakly stated and unknown as to how it will actually happen. If i have a Vet come home from a war theater and has nightmares, getting diagnosed with PTSD, how does he get OUT of the database when he is adjusted to being 'normal' again? He is no longer suffering from any "questionable" mental conditions, so he should not be affected. Yet, the removal process is a joke. Typical red tape BS.
 
#12 ·
I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said: "The greatest thing about the second Amendment is that we won't need it until they try to take it away from us"

Now my quote may not be word for word, but its pretty darn close. And I couldn't agree more with Mr. Jefferson!
 
#13 ·
over here in england we have very tight laws who can own guns,we have two go though checks befor we can own them,the time is coming two you over there,we can see the changes that have been made for you and it will get harder for you, with all the killing you have over there it will get hard you wont belive the hard times we have two get guns.iv had them for 44 years now,back in the 1980 it was simple two get a gun then we did not need a licence two have them.but 1968, it changed and got harder .good luck
 
#14 ·
The killings are just an excuse to take the guns period for just that reason,England has not closed down there prisons and have a much worse murder record now that they did then. Making explosives ilegal never stopped those in Northern Ireland. No single place ever had les murder and crime when guns were banned. And when there were no guns avaliable (ruwanda I think) they killed over a million with machettes.
 
#15 ·
Im a veteran of OIF and was diagnosed with PTSD and dealt with about a year of hyper tension and anxiety. I learned to cope with it and calm myself. I havn't had a "freak out" spell for awhile since these usually happen when I hear gun shots. The most "I" will ever do when I supposely "Freak Out" is hit the deck and grab cover. Im not going to take the nearby person hostege or go and shoot up a mall because I see the enemy. PTSD is not Schizofrenia (i knwo I spelled it wrong) It is stressed brought on by depression and horrific images. It does not turn someone insane 100% of the time.
 
#17 ·
Wow Uh Oh you think someone with ADAD whatever shouldn't own a gun? I served with alot of people in the military that could easily be diagnosed with that word. I was never nervous about them having a gun and can't believe you would be. Just a freakin excuse to take guns. And I haven't heard of that many vets on shooting sprees. It mostly kids or religious fanatics or gangmembers. I think you should be totally about the 2nd amendment or not at all.
 
#18 ·
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety
 
  • Like
Reactions: 411man
#19 ·
The old lady went today to the courthouse to renew her CCW permit. Not only has it gone from $25 to $39, but even though she has had it for about 10 years, they now require you to not only print your trigger finger (for use on the permit) but had her go to the county jail and have all her fingerprints electronically taken and put into a database. (this was initially done when the first application is taken here, but was on cards back then). Now they are saying it will be 3-4 weeks before her permit is re-approved, as they have to re-conduct state & ferderal background checks. their claim at the probate judge's office is the Department of Homeland Security? is making them do all this again, hence the higher fees. If you already had one, it was a simple procedure (used to be) of paying the $25, taking the print of the trigger finger, do a background check and having yours that day (usually within 20 minutes). Anyone else see anything odd in this?
 
#21 ·
wasnt that the ploy i the ussr to declare someone insane to "facilitate" thier treatment and the saftey of society? glad (as a vet) i bought mine from private owners and gun show individuals.never did believe the background checks wouldnt be kept for future reference.i dont distrust govt just the a$$holes who have taken over it.but then im a bit paranoid,but just because your paranoid doesmt mean thier not watchin ya
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top