It would be interesting for me to hear some input from the healthcare and legal professionals that frequent this site and exactly how they feel these issues should to be handled.
It would be interesting, and might be valid and useful guidance, but how these matters SHOULD be handled is not as important as how these matters ARE being handled.
And as far as I can see, the way these matters ARE being handled is in whatever fashion the VA thinks is in their best interest, and gives them the least liability, without the burdensome, and bothersome effort required to FOLLOW FEDERAL LAW!!!!
There is a legal process that needs to be followed in order to declare someone prohibited from owning firearms. IF the stated reason for denial of rights is mental incompetence, the legal process is very specifically spelled out, and involves adjudication by a court, with both sides being allowed to present testimony and evidence under the usual rules.
The VA is NOT doing that. I think a case could be made that they are breaking the law, by not using the required due process.
A Doctor's
opinion, (or worse, a bureaucrat, even one with the letter DR in their title) ALONE is not enough. And I think that reporting someone as unstable, resulting in denial of fundamental rights, because they checked a certain box on a form isn't just unethical, I think it borders on criminal!
of course, that's just my opinion, and worth what you paid for it...
Some 15 years ago, I bought a rifle from a co-worker, because her husband, a disabled veteran, was being required by the VA to get rid of it. \
He had some serious medical problems, and some "mental issues" (he was "depressed"). Anyone who has had a long term medical problem can tell you how that can easily make you "depressed".
The (local) VA told him that he had to remove all firearms,
bows, swords and spears from his home, or they would refuse him treatment! I do not know if he could have successfully fought it, on legal grounds, the point was moot, because he elected to voluntarily comply with their demands.
I didn't think it was right, but it seemed to be within the VA's authority, as an "in house" matter. Their requirements (and decisions) only affected what the VA did, or didn't do.
This is an ENTIRELY different matter than "someone" at the VA deciding to report you (and remember, it may NOT be the doctor you see and speak with that reports you..) being "mentally unstable" to OTHER government agencies, which are required by their own rules to place "mentally unstable" people on the prohibited person list.
The people this is happening to are individuals, without an effective collective voice, who are, as I see it, being denied established due process, and the basic constitutional protection of equal treatment under the law. These people are, effectively, being convicted, and punished, without having their "day in court".
I'm a Veteran, and I have some medical problems, but I would NOT willingly go to the VA, for ANY reason. It's a personal matter, but I would rather live my entire remaining life under crushing debt to private medical treatment than risk falling into the clutches of the VA system...
I have a great deal of sympathy for those fellow vets for whom the VA is the only choice. It is enough that they risked their lives in service to their country, they should NOT have to risk their lives, OR THEIR RIGHTS to GET service FROM their country. Sadly, if you go to the VA, that is what you get. Risk.