Senate battle over veterans' gun rights

[mmckee1952]

(WASHINGTON TIMES) A major defense-spending bill hit an unexpected bump on its journey through the U.S. Senate over an amendment on veterans’ gun rights, which devolved into a heated floor debate and foreshadows a potential battle over Democrats’ vows to tweak the filibuster rules in the clubby, traditionally collegial body.

Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, wants veterans who have been deemed “mentally incompetent” to have their cases adjudicated by a judge — rather than the Department of Veterans Affairs, as happens currently — and argued that veterans who simply cannot support themselves financially are needlessly given the label and, as such, cannot buy or possess firearms.

“We’re not asking for anything big,” Mr. Coburn said Thursday evening on the Senate floor. “We’re just saying that if you’re going to take away the Second Amendment rights … they ought to have it adjudicated, rather than mandated by someone who’s unqualified to state that they should lose their rights.”

Read More:
Change on veterans? gun rights lights fire - Washington Times

 

[sleepercell]

And of course the Brady Bunch weighs in "B-b-b-but if this passes a hundred THOUSAND people will INSTANTLY be able to buy a gun!" which is a flat out lie of course. The bill says that the case will go before a judge, instead of the DVA. I'm not even expecting honesty out of the Brady bunch, which would be like expecting to get, I dunno, Apple juice from a crabapple? I do at least expect a better tactic.

 

[dogshawred]

Who's Really Qualified?

Loosing a civil liberty given by the constitution should be controled through the Judicary System. Under no circumstance should this be controled by an appointed bureaucrat that may have no understanding of the laws involved or may be too involved politically to make an impartial assessment.