By Virgina Kruta, Contributor
There is nothing new about the idea that the government would use mental health status as a reason to deny an individual’s Second Amendment rights. In fact, most Americans are in favor of that in some measure. Most agree, for example, that there are certain psychiatric conditions that make access to weapons an unacceptable risk.
But which psychiatric conditions? How severe must each individual case be to warrant an infringement of God-given and Constitutionally protected rights? And perhaps the most important question of all: to whom will we grant the authority to determine the answers to all of these questions?
Not surprisingly, things start to get really sticky when the government inserts itself into the screening process. And when the individual being screened is a current or former member of the Armed Forces, the government is already more or less embedded.
About 18 months ago, shock stories circulated on several conservative and pro-gun sites. They showed photos of letters received by real veterans from the VA, letters that informed our nation’s defenders that, based on the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act and a doctor’s note, they had been deemed unfit to defend themselves.
The letters were not written primarily to address firearm ownership, however. In fact, they mostly detailed the reasons that a guardian might have to be appointed over the veteran in order to oversee their physical and/or emotional well-being. Some mentioned a need for a legally appointed adviser to take control of the veteran’s medical and financial benefits. The paragraph concerning firearm ownership was buried in the middle of a few pages of legalese, in between the evidence for incompetence and instructions concerning further appeals.
The terrifying thing about these letters is not that the government wants to keep weapons out of the hands of individuals who might truly be a danger to themselves or others. It’s not even really that the VA posits itself as the arbiter of mental stability (although, given recent developments, that thought should certainly give one pause). The truly terrifying thing is the number of people who should know better and have laughed it off as far right “fear-mongering.”
In an article published in February of 2013, Bob Owens (editor at Bearing Arms and contributor at Pajamas Media) called the articles exactly that. He explained that these letters only go to the severely mentally compromised, so soldiers with mild PTSD should not worry. He even quoted an expert as saying it applied specifically to veterans who were “…comatose, made poor life decisions, spent their VA checks on drugs, or were pissed off that the T-Rex in the backyard was eating their vegetables.”
What is so scary about that? Of course, someone who is comatose has no use for a weapon. An addict probably can’t be trusted with his benefit money. And it’s hardly unreasonable to suggest that hallucinations don’t generally mix well with access to handguns.
But he also said this applies to soldiers and veterans who “make poor life decisions.” And now the VA and any number of other bureaucracies have positioned themselves as the arbiters of what constitutes “poor life decisions.” What happens when “I would like to own an AR-15” becomes a “poor life decision”?
Worse than that, how many soldiers might avoid what little care they can expect from the VA – care they may actually need – because they are afraid of losing their rights? How many soldiers have already been treated by the VA and now simply wait, at the mercy of the bureaucrats, to learn whether or not they will be able to defend themselves and their families in the event of an emergency?
A personal friend of mine and of The Dana Show, Marine Lance Corporal David Moose McArthur, is one such veteran.
Because of my diagnosis, my traumatic brain injury and PTSD, I have been deemed unfit and in need of a caregiver. It is now up to the leading doctor to determine whether I am a threat to myself or others. So basically it is down to one guy who has the power to strip me of my personal freedoms because I have nightmares and can't always remember to shave or pay bills on time.
Seems legit, right?
——
Virgina Kruta is a small business owner, veteran, blogger, and holds a BS in History and Political Science.
