re all the argument on H.R. 2640, how come the following seems ignored?

alan

New member
The following is excerpted from an NRA alert dated 22 June. If correct, the following raises serious question as to the antics of bureaucrats at the VA, as well as the Clinton Administration, one headed by what some have described as a "draft dodger". Of course, similar questions can/have been raised re President Bush, the current Bush that is. It seems to me that the question of why The Congress hasn't simply "86'd" the questionable action of the VA needs to be answered. Seems that it hasn't even been addressed, for if the Congress had acted, as perhaps it should have, H.R. 2640 might have been rendered moot. Please read the following excerpt.

In several ways this bill is better for gun owners than current law. Under H.R. 2640, certain types of mental health orders will no longer prohibit a person from possessing or receiving a firearm. Examples are adjudications that have expired or been removed, or commitments from which a person has been completely released with no further supervision required. Also excluded are federal decisions about a person's mental health that consist only of a medical diagnosis, without a specific finding that the person is dangerous or mentally incompetent. The latter provision addresses very real concerns about disability decisions by the Veterans Administration concerning our brave men and women in uniform. Remember that one of the Clinton Administration's last acts was to force the names of almost 90,000 veterans and veterans' family members to be added to a "prohibited" list. H.R. 2640 would help many of these people get their rights restored. H.R. 2640 will also require all participating federal or state agencies to establish "relief from disability" programs that would allow a person to get the mental health prohibition removed, either administratively or in court. This type of relief has not been available at the federal level for the past 15 years.
 
Back
Top