A bit of propaganda from the Veterans Administration, encouraging family members to take guns away from veterans who have served our country. It’s worth noting that the Brady Campaign is fully on board with disarming our country’s veterans of their firearms, some of which would be bring backs that were paid for in their blood, and the blood of their fellow soldiers.
To me this is much like the issue of pediatricians and guns with children in the house. I don’t, as a matter of absolute principle, think it’s wrong to have the discussion. It’s the way the discussion is framed that is problematic. Certainly a family who has a loved one suffering from severe Dementia, or that has mental difficulties that make him a danger to themselves or others, would be doing the responsible thing by removing firearms (and other dangerous objects) from the home. I also don’t have an issue with the VA advising families of this, along with a discussion of other dangers someone with Dementia can face. But here’s what your tax dollars are paying for:
The presence of firearms in households has been linked to increased risk of injury or death for everyone in or around the home, usually as an impulsive act during some disagreement. This danger is increased when one of the persons in the household has dementia.
Let me translate this:
Propaganda put forward by the gun ban lobby suggests that your veteran family member, who served his country with distinction and to whom we owe our continued freedom, is likely to murder you in an argument if there’s a gun in the home. Just, if he has Dementia, he is much more likely to murder you with a gun in the home.
It continues:
Family members do not always take appropriate action to unload, secure, or remove firearms in the home. These actions should be taken regardless of the severity of dementia or whether your loved one is suffering from a behavioral problem or depression.
Translation:
You family member, who served his country and was trusted with automatic weapons, grenades, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, can’t be trusted with firearms, regardless of whether your loved one is having issues or not.
The Obama anti-gun propaganda continues to suggest that love ones may be reluctant, believing in this quaint notion of Second Amendment rights, and the perceived independence that goes along with gun ownership. But don’t let that dissuade you: the veteran loved one needs to be disarmed for his own good. It’s the right thing.
If folks were wondering what Obama meant by “under the radar” this is it. This is why he has to go in November. Your tax dollars paid for this offensive nonsense, which encourages families to infantilize and disarm our nation’s veterans, regardless of the troubles they are having. This is grossly offensive to the service they rendered our country, and the Obama Administration ought to be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing anyone to put this to print.
UPDATE: Looks like I’m two months late to this issue! Oh well, I can’t notice everything.
“To me this is much like the issue of pediatricians and guns with children in the house.”
Strongly disagree: in pediatrics I see this as a white line boundary violation. I might go so far as to say that if a health practitioner thinks the parents are that bad why aren’t they calling the local child protective services as required by law? If a doctor tried to pull that stunt on me I’d fire him on the spot and report him to the local board (which might actually work where I live…).
In the VA situation where the doctor is treating the individual who might genuinely need to be separated from his guns, boundary violations don’t come into play like that. That’s of course referring to direct actions like Clinton’s VA putting vets on the NICS without justification or the required hearing, not this bit of part-propaganda/part-potentially good advice if someone is truly suffering from dementia.
I don’t have a problem with doctors offering advice on how to manage either a small child or someone an with dementia. I don’t have a problem with that advice being to manage common hazards, firearms being among them. What I don’t appreciate is the anti-gun propaganda, and the condescending nature of the pamphlet. Had this just been a discussion of common household hazards to think about, I wouldn’t have given it any thought, even if the advice was to remove or secure firearms if the dementia was severe enough that the person could be a danger to himself or others.
My problem with the physicians was their putting questions about firearms on questionnaires patients were required to fill out or it was at least implied had to be filled out. How the data would be used or stored or with whom it would be shared was not made clear.
But it isn’t in the realm of common advice about kids and dangerous objects. If you answer one of those forms honestly, the pediatrician will trot out HCI crap and try to convince you to sell your firearms.
It is a clear medical ethics boundary violation, and every such form you see in a doctor’s office should cause you to make an immediate ethics violation complaint to your state’s medical board.
I just agree wth mentalillness being a good time to remove the ammo and or guns to protect your loved one and you yourself from being harmed in your own home. And frm the hands of criminals. This is AMERICA WHY DO WE HAVE CRIMINALS? I say let me keep my gun so we can remove the criminals wth out facing charges of mental illness or coruption.
http://www.pagunblog.com/2012/05/16/obamas-va-attacking-second-amendment-rights-of-veterans/#comments
The best way to reduce gun risks is to remove the gun from your home.
It is also the best way to reduce the rewards of guns. Likewise, the best way to reduce financial risk is to not invest.
Don’t agree with it. When I was dealing with issues from deployment I myself (no advice from anyone) locked up everything and gave the key to the SO. Then I went and got help. Once I no longer had anything to deal with I got my key back.
Glad to hear that this worked out. There are definitely soldiers coming back who are fighting some serious problems, and I think encouraging veterans to think about handing off weapons to relatives temporarily is a better solution than permanent removal or disposal.
Glad it worked out too, and thanks for your service.
Key difference, that was of your own free will, not some .gov tool trying to talk your family into it behind your back.
Glad stuff worked out, BTW.
Needless to say I didn’t need anyone taking my weapons away from me. That was a choice I had to make. Anyone trying to take them away without consulting me or without my consent would have been met with hostility.
I think that’s the point – it’s hard to build trust with someone when you go around behind his back locking up his guns.
Obama’s team just doesn’t understand guns at all. They don’t own them, don’t know how to use them, don’t really know what they’re used for, and don’t have the first clue of the cost/benefit analysis of living in an armed vs. disarmed society. As ever, the road to hell starts with a vision of Utopia.
It’s interesting as well as appalling to think of OUR Veteran’s Administration as “OBAMA’S Veteran’s Administration”, as the United States is “OUR COUNTRY” – NOT “OBAMA’S”, and that also goes for the VA!!! Obama has NO RIGHT to use his office or ANY governmental agency for HIS personal hidden agendas, especially that of disarming the citizens of OUR country, which will open the door to foreign invasion and take over. If not for OUR Second Amendment RIGHTS, and for ARMED CITIZENS, this country would have been invaded and taken over long ago – armed citizens are this countries second line of defense against foreign invasion, should our military forces fail, so the way I see it, Obama was PUT into office as this countrie’s TROJAN HORSE, to weaken and RUIN “OUR” country, by WASTING as much of OUR money as he can in four years, and doing everything he can to TRY to convince us that we can’t be trusted to own and use firearms, and our not having them is for OUR own good. This is coming from a man who has not one bit of respect for our nations flag and what it stands for – you have no respect for OUR flag, you have no respect for OUR COUNTRY!!! WHAT GOOD are “YOU” doing HERE “OBAMA”??? OBAMA, YOU NEED TO GO!!! Another four years of YOU as President will be “THE END” of this great nation, and THAT is what YOU WANT!!!
Another piece of the puzzle is the intake questions, asked by the nurses; which specifically ask if you are depressed or have contemplated suicide. If so, you immediately go on the mental health risk with NCIS and cannot purchase a weapon, you will be denied EVERY time!
I have many friends who would have to answer yes to “have contemplated suicide,” yet are people I’d trust with a gun. I’ve found among my friends I’m unusual in that I’ve never so much as given it a thought. This is a completely unreasonable standard, especially for people who served their country with distinction. The standard ought to be are you now, right now, a danger to yourself or others. And even then, I’d prefer that be handled on a voluntary basis, with no impacts on rights. To deny rights you should have to go through with a commitment, or some kind of deal where there is an adversarial hearing that allows you to refute the claims against you. Anything less does not amount to due process.
The other thing is that honest mental health professionals try really hard to avoid gotchas like these. It’s hard enough to people to seek treatment for a whole bunch of reasons; adding a major loss of rights, especially unjustified when it comes to depression, is Stark Raving Mad, as it were.