• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

US Senate votes to block rule preventing mentally impaired from buying guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

shinobi602

Member
I can't...
@AP BREAKING: Senate votes to block Obama-era rule preventing mentally impaired Social Security recipients from buying guns.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/ap/status/831897054087696384

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-led Senate has voted to block an Obama-era regulation that would prevent an estimated 75,000 people with mental disorders from being able to purchase a firearm.

The 57 to 43 vote to revoke the regulation now sends the measure to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it.

The Obama administration rule strengthened the federal background check system by requiring the Social Security Administration to include the names of beneficiaries with mental impairments who also have a third party to manage their benefits.

But critics say the rule was too broad and unfairly stigmatized the disabled. With a Republican ally in the White House, the GOP has moved aggressively to rescind several late Obama administration regulations.
Click to expand...
https://apnews.com/553ff88b430a4334...n=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP
 
N

n00bsauce87

Member
Aren't we pro-mentally ill shouldn't be able to buy guns? I mean wasn't that the entire case that we shouldn't ban guns but address mental health?

I mean this was a slam dunk vote and the NRA money was just more important it seems
 
S

Sho_Nuff82

Member
And the next time a gun spree happens, we'll revert back to the "but mental illness, not guns" excuse and the idiotic parade will keep walking in circles. The NRA doesn't want restrictions on gun sales because they want money, not for ideological purity or safety.
 
B

BrutishMrFish

Member
For being the party that likes to say "It's a mental health problem, not a gun problem," they sure seem bent on addressing neither.
 
O

onadesertedisland

Member
Fuck it, let's not only let them buy them, let's give them guns. Have a program for the mentally impaired that cannot afford guns to receive free weapons. The right will like more guns and the left will like welfare! It's a can't lose proposition!!!
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
Doesn't this rule include anorexia for some reason?

I'm all for gun control, but how does stuff like that make it into these bills just giving the republicans ammo to overturn them?
 
R

rrs

Member
The Obama administration rule strengthened the federal background check system by requiring the Social Security Administration to include the names of beneficiaries with mental impairments who also have a third party to manage their benefits.
Click to expand...
inability to manage money != inability to be responsible with a weapon
 
L

Llyranor

Member
I feel like "Don't ban guns (for the mentally ill), ban mental illness (while cutting mental health services)" would be a slogan they would use
 
S

ShOcKwAvE

Member
Sorry but how was cloture invoked if 60 are needed? I guess I need to read up on rules because I figured the Dems could filibuster stuff like this.
 
M

Mammoth Jones

Member
"But critics say the rule was too broad and unfairly stigmatized the disabled."
Click to expand...

How? Details? Examples of someone that's impaired that should still retain their firearm rights? I'm well aware the government could write the law so broad to lump in folks with no real impairment to stop them from owning guns. Need to list these "broad" cases in the rule to get an idea if it's indeed too broad or not.

Some better details here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/senate-wants-block-rule-guns-mentally-ill/

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the regulation unfairly stigmatizes the disabled and infringes on their constitutional right to bear arms. He said that the mental disorders covered through the regulation are filled with ”vague characteristics that do not fit into the federal mentally defective standard" prohibiting someone from buying or owning a gun.

Grassley cited eating and sleep disorders as examples of illnesses that could allow a beneficiary to be reported to the background check system if they also need a third party to manage their benefits.

Also:
The American Civil Liberties Union has joined with the NRA in fighting the regulation, as has an independent federal agency charged with advising the president and Congress on government policy. The National Council on Disability said there is no nexus between the inability to manage money and the ability to safely possess and use a firearm.
Click to expand...

onadesertedisland said:
So wait, can't be trusted with money, but can be trusted with death machine?
Click to expand...

That's not how laws work. Someone can CHOSE to allow someone to handle their money if they want. Doesn't mean they lose their firearm rights. That being said if a judge adjudicates them incompetent then yes, no guns allowed for that person.

Possession of a firearm by the mentally ill is regulated by both state and federal laws.
Federal Law
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person ”has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution."
 
T

TheOfficeMut

Unconfirmed Member
Mammoth Jones said:
How? Details? Examples of someone that's impaired that should still retain their firearm rights? I'm well aware the government could write the law so broad to lump in folks with no real impairment to stop them from owning guns. Need to list these "broad" cases in the rule to get an idea if it's indeed too broad or not.

Some better details here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/senate-wants-block-rule-guns-mentally-ill/
Click to expand...

Lmao so mentally unstable to them is being unable to manage money effectively?
 
J

jfkgoblue

Member
There are very few voting Republicans who are against this regulation, the power of the NRA's lobby is insane. That is the definition of the "swamp" that needs to be drained.
 
O

onadesertedisland

Member
Mammoth Jones said:
How? Details? Examples of someone that's impaired that should still retain their firearm rights? I'm well aware the government could write the law so broad to lump in folks with no real impairment to stop them from owning guns. Need to list these "broad" cases in the rule to get an idea if it's indeed too broad or not.

Some better details here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/senate-wants-block-rule-guns-mentally-ill/





That's not how laws work. Someone can CHOSE to allow someone to handle their money if they want. Doesn't mean they lose their firearm rights. That being said if a judge adjudicates them incompetent then yes, no guns allowed for that person.

Possession of a firearm by the mentally ill is regulated by both state and federal laws.
Federal Law
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”
Click to expand...
Seems like a choice to me. If they want a firearm, they shouldn't choose someone to manage their money.
 
A

Alex_Mexico

Member
All this hilarious overreaction to terrorism and yet they make it even easier to buy a gun inside their own country. How can they be this evil?
 
G

Glix

Member
rrs said:
inability to manage money != inability to be responsible with a weapon
Click to expand...

I think they are talking about ppl like Brit Spears who are not allowed to touch their own money because they are so mentally impaired.

They are not talking about ppl with a financial advisor
 
H

Hyun Sai

Member
Bah, any mentally impaired can use a knife for similar results (if he really wants to kill though).

Or so I was told
 
T

TheOfficeMut

Unconfirmed Member
Mammoth Jones said:
Please throw some shade to the ACLU and the National Council for the Disabled. They support this.
Click to expand...

It's weird, isn't it? I can see the argument for why they'd support this (after all, they are for the disabled). But if you are an organization dedicated to helping out the disabled, clearly that's an admission that you know these people need help. So now they're suddenly perfectly capable of wielding firearms?

When keeping it real goes too far.
 
G

Glix

Member
TheOfficeMut said:
It's weird, isn't it? I can see the argument for why they'd support this, after all, they are for the disabled. But if you are an organization dedicated to helping out the disabled, clearly that's an admission that you know these people need help. So now they're suddenly perfectly capable of wielding firearms?

When keeping it real goes too far.
Click to expand...

Thays not at all how the thought process goes.

They belive this infringes on their rights as spelled out in the constitution. Thats it. Thats their fulcrum.
 
V

Valhelm

contribute something
Sho_Nuff82 said:
And the next time a gun spree happens, we'll revert back to the "but mental illness, not guns" excuse and the idiotic parade will keep walking in circles. The NRA doesn't want restrictions on gun sales because they want money, not for ideological purity or safety.
Click to expand...

Unless the killer is non-white. Then we need to batter down the hatches and enact martial law in minority neighborhoods.
 
M

Mammoth Jones

Member
TheOfficeMut said:
It's weird, isn't it? I can see the argument for why they'd support this (after all, they are for the disabled). But if you are an organization dedicated to helping out the disabled, clearly that's an admission that you know these people need help. So now they're suddenly perfectly capable of wielding firearms?

When keeping it real goes too far.
Click to expand...

Some are. Some are not. There's nuance to it. That's the concern. That the law does not allow for that level of nuance. The law should be re-design and re-pushed. The intention makes sense on the surface.

Legislators that want this law need to sit down with folks from the ACLU and the Disability Council and work on making sure the law doesn't fuck those edge cases over. This way at the same time it can do what it's intended to do: Keep guns out of the hands of severely incapacitated people.
 
G

geomon

Member
Mammoth Jones said:
Please throw some shade to the ACLU and the National Council for the Disabled. They support this.
Click to expand...
No. The ACLU and the NCD support rights and civil liberties for everyone (in NCD's case the disabled). They have to support this just on principle. The NRA writes legislation for their bought and paid for congressmen to introduce and then vote on.
 
P

PillarEN

Member
Damn so they actually got it blocked. Figured it already happened when this was brought up some weeks ago. Well the NRA pops some champagne tonight.
 
M

Mammoth Jones

Member
geomon said:
No. The ACLU and the NCD support rights and civil liberties for everyone (in NCD's case the disabled). They have to support this just on principle. The NRA writes legislation for their bought and paid for congressmen to introduce and then vote on.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm talking about people complaining about this specific thread topic in general. Sorry for the confusion.
 
G

Gordon Shumway

Banned
TheOfficeMut said:
Until someone who's mentally unstable lights up one of their asses.
Click to expand...

commandowrong.gif


They're replaceable..
 
I

i-Lo

Member
Round about way of population control. This is a betrayal against common sense and safety.

The greatest country in the world alright.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

67 Environmental Rules on the Way Out Under Trump
2
98
8K
GrizzleBoy replied
  • Locked
House votes to roll back Obama rule states on gun background checks
2
86
9K
elrechazado replied
  • Locked
Trump signs bill revoking gun checks for people with mental illnesses
2 3 4
177
21K
Subpar Scrub replied
  • Locked
GOP votes to end rule stopping coal mining debris from being dumped in streams
2 3 4 5
247
27K
Ludovico replied
New Sanctions, New Powers: Senate votes to impose new sanctions on Russia and Iran
27
4K
Zolo replied
Top Bottom