As I understand the information given, the title & focus of the discussion that, it is SSI who is creating a gun prohibition rule, is FACTUALLY INCORRECT.
SSI is reporting certain data to the Attorney General. Which, they are NOW required to do by law. After that point, their involvement ENDS.
Consequently, that an individual might be determined disabled by the SSA due to mental illness does not mean his medical records, or his determination to be disabled due to mental illness, will be ‘automatically’ placed in the NICS database.
The determination of what goes into the NICS database is made by the DOJ, not SSA.
Moreover, should an individual be designated as a prohibited person pursuant to a NICS background check due to mental illness, he has the right to appeal that determination as anyone else subject to a denial.
Therefore, just because someone is approved for Social Security benefits based on a mental illness does not mean he will be denied the right to possess a firearm; and should an individual’s final determination be that he is indeed a prohibited person, it will come after being afforded his comprehensive due process rights, consistent with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.
Point of order here, If you are determined to be a prohibited person, your rights are denied. Once cannot "appeal" or "apply for relief from" something that has not happened.
It is incorrect to state (or imply) that your rights are not denied because there is an appeals process, or that your rights are not denied until the appeals process is complete. IF you win the appeal your rights are RESTORED. You cannot restore something that was not lost. So, legally, and effectively, from the moment the system logs you as a prohibited person, your right is denied.
I do not know if this specific issue should be presented as a malicious act, a parting shot by the departing administration, but absent clear evidence of that, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice by presenting it as such.
This is, literally, an instance of the government TRYING to close the "loophole" (aka "cracks in the system") which is something that we all
demanded they do!
The problem seems to be with the way it is being done, and is being magnified by the way it is being reported as being done.
This is a can of worms, because we are dealing with gun rights, privacy rights, bureaucratic systems, and various laws.
There have been more than one of the mass killers "in the system" to one degree or another before they went on their murder rampage. The system didn't stop them. Sometimes the system didn't stop them because it failed. sometimes, it didn't stop them because it was
operating correctly.
About 30 years ago, the mass murder at a Stockton CA school set off the whole "assault weapon" hysteria that resulted in the mess we are still dealing with. It happened, despite the system working correctly. The killer went through California's 15 day waiting period & background check twice, purchasing a handgun on two separate occasions.
The killer went to Oregon and obtained a semi auto AK pattern rifle. (he could have gotten the same thing in California at the time, there is no evidence he went to Oregon to avoid any CA law)
The killer was receiving SSI checks because he was "mentally disabled and unable to work". At the time, SSA was FORBIDDEN to give that information to the state of California, BY LAW. Doing so would be a violation of his medical privacy rights.
The system, as it existed at that time, worked correctly. Since then, things, including laws, have been changed. Now, SSA is required to report certain things.
And here we are, with people unhappy about those certain things, and what is done with them.
