4.2M New Prohibited Persons

[joshs]

The Obama administration is planning on adding anyone who receives SSA benefits through a representative payee to NICS. http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-gun-law-20150718-story.html#page=1

[Drang]

A surprisingly even-handed description of just what is wrong with this strategy, considering the source.

Of course, it kinda misses the point early on:

The push is intended to bring the Social Security Administration in line with laws regulating who gets reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, which is used to prevent gun sales to felons, drug addicts, immigrants in the country illegally and others.
Should, of course, read "which is sold as preventing gun sales to felons, drug addicts, illegal immigrants, while simply making life as difficult as possible for the law-abiding."
/snark

[PPGMD]

Got to love the extensive Sandy Hook pictures, and images. When Sandy Hook had nothing to do with the new class of prohibited persons.

[joshs]

Got to love the extensive Sandy Hook pictures, and images. When Sandy Hook had nothing to do with the new class of prohibited persons.

The fact that nearly every high-profile mass shooter passed a background check hasn't stopped anti-gun advocates from using mass shootings to justify expanded background checks. A disconnect between the alleged problem and proposed "solution" is pretty much SOP for gun control policies.

[Malamute]

Yes, but they have to DO something,...even if it has nothing to do with the "problem".

[BehindBlueI's]

Are they automatically pulling their driver's licenses as well? In all seriousness, I would wager that the folks who are about to be "prohibited" kill way more people via lousy driving ability then by firearm use.

[Hatchetman]

Hey now, folks with ingrown toenails might get really annoyed with the pain and open fire on a busload of nuns or something. Fortunately under Obamacare we can identify these ticking bombs and preclude them from purchasing firearms. I mean if we can't shame people into not owning guns then perhaps we can medical condition them beyond the reach of the second amendment.

[Chance]

That proposal is lunacy, and I doubt it will survive to the end of the week. What were they thinking?

[joshs]

That proposal is lunacy, and I doubt it will survive to the end of the week. What were they thinking?

The VA already does the same thing to veterans who receive benefits through a representative payee.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

[cclaxton]

The fact that nearly every high-profile mass shooter passed a background check hasn't stopped anti-gun advocates from using mass shootings to justify expanded background checks. A disconnect between the alleged problem and proposed "solution" is pretty much SOP for gun control policies.
Agreed. So shouldn't the NRA be focusing their talking points and advertising and legal challenges based on this very logical argument? (There is no reason to improve background checks because there is no correlation and thus this will not improve things.)

The NRA seems to focus most of its energy on demonizing our political leaders (especially Democrats), rather than making the case directly to the American People about the illogical responses to these high profile murders. The public, even Democrats and minorities, have changed to a majority support the idea that a gun will help prevent crime than make them more unsafe. It just seems we are not exploiting that change. The fact that the background check didn't work for Dylan Roof is embarrassing since the vast majority would agree that at-risk individuals should be prevented from possession/purchase. Would Dylan Roof have found another way to buy a gun and do the murders?...We will never know. But the perception is bad.

I wish the NRA would focus less on the partisanship and more on getting the General Public to convince their representatives to change their positions on gun control. After all, politicians will lose their jobs if they don't win elections. The list of Democrats who support gun rights will continue to grow.
Cody

[joshs]

Agreed. So shouldn't the NRA be focusing their talking points and advertising and legal challenges based on this very logical argument? (There is no reason to improve background checks because there is no correlation and thus this will not improve things.)

The NRA seems to focus most of its energy on demonizing our political leaders (especially Democrats), rather than making the case directly to the American People about the illogical responses to these high profile murders. The public, even Democrats and minorities, have changed to a majority support the idea that a gun will help prevent crime than make them more unsafe. It just seems we are not exploiting that change. The fact that the background check didn't work for Dylan Roof is embarrassing since the vast majority would agree that at-risk individuals should be prevented from possession/purchase. Would Dylan Roof have found another way to buy a gun and do the murders?...We will never know. But the perception is bad.

I wish the NRA would focus less on the partisanship and more on getting the General Public to convince their representatives to change their positions on gun control. After all, politicians will lose their jobs if they don't win elections. The list of Democrats who support gun rights will continue to grow.
Cody

I'm not sure what messaging you are talking about, NRA endorses and grades politicians based on their stance on gun rights. Do you get the ILA Grassroots Alert? That's were most of the more sophisticated arguments are made regarding various issues. A 30 second add isn't a very good place to try to make a point that takes several minutes to fully explain.

On your point on Roof, I'm not sure how you think "at-risk" individuals like him should be prohibited unless the feds develop a magic crystal ball or every single misdemeanor arrest becomes disqualifying under federal law (which wouldn't be constitutional).

Full disclosure: I'm an employee of NRA-ILA.

[cclaxton]

I'm not sure what messaging you are talking about, NRA endorses and grades politicians based on their stance on gun rights. Do you get the ILA Grassroots Alert? That's were most of the more sophisticated arguments are made regarding various issues. A 30 second add isn't a very good place to try to make a point that takes several minutes to fully explain.

On your point on Roof, I'm not sure how you think "at-risk" individuals like him should be prohibited unless the feds develop a magic crystal ball or every single misdemeanor arrest becomes disqualifying under federal law (which wouldn't be constitutional).

Full disclosure: I'm an employee of NRA-ILA.
Josh,
I don't think I get the Grassroots alert. You are right that often these arguments need more explanation, but with clever PR people...all things are possible.
Ah, I see there were false reports that he was arrested for a felony, turned out to be misdemeanor...sorry, didn't see the updated information until now.
But I bet the perception is still out there in the public mind.
Cody

[Lon]

I deal with plenty of people at work who fall into the 4.2 million. I read that question carefully when I filled out the 4473 on the gun I picked up today. I could see how it might pass a court review. Look at the wording of the question:3636


or are incompetent to manage your own affairs

Pretty much sums up why someone has a payee.

[Dagga Boy]

I find the easiest way to get progressives to shut their suckholes on gun control stuff is simply to make it equal to voting rights. Personally, I think they are on an equal level. If you need a background check and ID to buy a gun, shouldn't you need the same to vote as the restrictions are pretty much identical. If you are against an ID to vote, guess you would be in favor of no ID's to buy a gun as that would be racist and anti poverty and elderly. Have a social security payee.....guess you shouldn't vote either. I am all for Marijuana and other drug users banned from voting and gun ownership as it seems we do have a solid correlation with drug use (both legal and illegal) with mass shootings.
So.....I would like to see a NiCS clearance to vote, just like I am subjected to to buy a firearm.

[joshs]

I deal with plenty of people at work who fall into the 4.2 million. I read that question carefully when I filled out the 4473 on the gun I picked up today. I could see how it might pass a court review. Look at the wording of the question:3636



Pretty much sums up why someone has a payee.

Except that definition on the form is contrary to the statutory language and established case law. For way more info on the topic, see: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=ATF-2014-0002-0187

As a practical matter, many people have a payee assigned for convenience or because the recipient is a minor.

[cclaxton]

I find the easiest way to get progressives to shut their suckholes on gun control stuff is simply to make it equal to voting rights. Personally, I think they are on an equal level. If you need a background check and ID to buy a gun, shouldn't you need the same to vote as the restrictions are pretty much identical. If you are against an ID to vote, guess you would be in favor of no ID's to buy a gun as that would be racist and anti poverty and elderly. Have a social security payee.....guess you shouldn't vote either. I am all for Marijuana and other drug users banned from voting and gun ownership as it seems we do have a solid correlation with drug use (both legal and illegal) with mass shootings.
So.....I would like to see a NiCS clearance to vote, just like I am subjected to to buy a firearm.
Pretty good analogy. Personally, though, I think voting is an obligation and everyone, including felons, should vote.
You are right about the correlation of drug use and mass shootings, though....got any hard data on that?
Cody

[Dagga Boy]

Pretty good analogy. Personally, though, I think voting is an obligation and everyone, including felons, should vote.
You are right about the correlation of drug use and mass shootings, though....got any hard data on that?
Cody

As far as voting and the 2nd amendment. The standards and restrictions have been fairly close until recently. Equally, the same folks who tried to keep freed slaves and other minorities from owning guns are the same folks behind Jim Crow laws. The democrats have simply found a new group to segregate and discriminate against. I guess President Obama is the the Woodrow Wilson of our time, just with a different group of folks.

As far as drugs and mass shooters. I think all but one had drug issues whether that being prescribed drugs for psychological issues, illegal drugs, or a combo. And yes, this includes Marijuana. All the marijuana advocates always seem to leave out people like the guy who shot Gabby Giffords who was a big marijuana user along with his other issues. As a cop, the mixing of illegal drugs in combo with mental illness and many of those taking medication for mental illness issues are also using illicit drugs that compound issues. Of course......the medical community (you know all those doctors against guns) are one of the biggest offenders about not getting people in NiCS who need to be, and all the folks calling for more background stuff seem to be forget this.

[Cincinnatus]

A member on another forum made the very good point that this is not about the elderly directly, but about moving toward the goal of eventually making sure an elderly person with a large gun collection cannot pass it on to his children.

[cclaxton]

Isn't that why we invented gun trusts?
Cody