House Republicans move to scrap Obama rule on gun background checks

by
February 3, 2017

BG Check

The Republican-controlled House on Thursday took its first steps toward strengthening gun ownership under President Donald Trump, moving to scrap a requirement for background checks for disabled Social Security recipients mentally incapable of managing their own affairs.

The regulation, issued in the final months of President Barack Obama’s term, is one of a handful congressional Republicans are rolling back, knowing they habe a new ally in the White House. The Senate is poised to scuttle an Obama rule preventing coal mining debris from being dumped into nearby streams.

“In my home state of Kentucky and others across the nation, the Stream Buffer Rule will cause major damage to communities and threaten coal jobs,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

The House passed the gun resolution on Wednesday and Senate approval on Thursday will send the measure to Trump for his signature.

Obama’s background check rule required the Social Security Administration to forward to the Justice Department the names of certain disabled beneficiaries for a database of individuals ineligible to purchase a firearm. The rule affects an estimated 75,000 beneficiaries who require a representative to manage their benefits because of a disabling mental disorder.

34 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • keith says:

    Needing someone to manage your money is not the same thing as being mentally incapable. There are alot of people that would spend their money thoughtless, and cannot pay for their necessitys. People such as this need someone to manage their money and pay their bills and manage the money, but they should be able to defend themselves. this does not make them totally incapable of responsible thought. This law is an over reach of power just waiting to happen.

    1. bobnstuff says:

      The law doesn’t stop people who can’t manage their money from buying guns. You have been miss lead on the law. It’s people who are declared mentally incompetent that are restricted. Big difference.

      1. Retired says:

        Evident you did not read what was all entailed .

        1. bobnstuff says:

          A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to “marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency,
          condition, or disease.”
          Is this not what it said?

          1. Retired says:

            There was a hell of a lot more to it than that part , why are you leaving out the rest ??

          2. Retired says:

            How about the actual papers that he signed.

          3. bobnstuff says:

            So show me how it’s different.

          4. Retired says:

            Typical lefty answer when they can not come up with the total facts because it was not in their Script . just like they can’t answer without another question.

          5. bobnstuff says:

            Number of facts you have given here, Zero. Amount of proof of your statements, Zero. You are batting 100 except for that one you are missing.

          6. Retired says:

            Yes you are the biggest ZERO posting next to your twin AKLady.

          7. bobnstuff says:

            Defend you statement with facts and links if you can but my guess is you won’t because you are holding an empty bag.

          8. Retired says:

            You are a typical Democrat start a Question and answer with a question, typical bag of wind. I don’t fall for your type of entrapment , because that is your game here.

  • justinwachin says:

    I’m not sure it is wise to completely dismantle this rule. If someone is mentally incompetent I’m not sure they should be allowed to possess a gun. If someone is unable to understand the ramifications of their actions they may not need to have access to a gun.

    I don’t want government bureaucrats controlling my life, but if a crazy person kills a bunch of innocent people those people are going to be just as dead as if they were killed by a terrorist.

    1. Retired says:

      IT went way beyond being mentally incompetent, all you had to do was visit a shrink that treats you for depression and you were still able to work and drive . That would have qualified you to be barred from owning a gun, yet they did nothing about the under age kids killing people.

    2. gvette says:

      just a thought. The ones that seem to be able to get guns, don’t go by the law. Did you think about that?

      1. justinwachin says:

        Yes. That’s the problem with any efforts at gun control is someone is usually able to get a gun if they want one. That’s true even for those who should not have one due to mental issues.

  • Jean Langford M. says:

    ADIOS TO THE TRAITOR IN CHIEFS DUMBASS GUN GRABBING RULES…ANOTHER “NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF THE LIATARD DUMBOCRAP”
    GUN GRABBING AGENDA”…THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS “STAT.” THE CONSTITUTION SAYS “WHAT IT SAYS” NO INTERPETATION NEEDED…PERIOD.

  • rhuland says:

    Someone needing a bit of help to manage his money is no reason to deny him the ability to protect himself with a firearm, especially if his condition makes him subject to being bullied. My late husband was brilliant in many ways, but he turned over management of family finances to me because I had better aptitude in math than he did. So I handled our finances for 35 years and he handled the sales aspects of our family business far better than I could because he had an outgoing personality.

    1. bobnstuff says:

      Did you actually check what the law said instead of the spin. The life you save maybe someone you love. Was your husband declared mentally incompetent? If he wasn’t then he wouldn’t have been stopped from buying a gun.

      1. Retired says:

        You are another Nut cake like Peelosi , we have to pass it to see what is in it. You evidently did not read what was in the Bill you friend Obama signed.

      2. gvette says:

        That’s right Bob. Only criminals should have guns. Your useless thoughts never cease to amaze me!

        1. bobnstuff says:

          Suicides are one of the major deaths from guns and people who are mentally unstable tend to shot them selves. A number of our mass shootings were done by mentally ill people. If a person is mentally unstable do you want them to have guns?

          1. gvette says:

            Well Bob, a lot of those were done with stolen guns. Not all. Like I said crooks don’t go to the gun store, other then to break in.

          2. bobnstuff says:

            If you have a gun in the house you just increased your chances of being shot by four times. As far a crooks going to gun shops you are wrong. A lot of the guns used in crimes are bought legally, maybe not by the person using them but as straw purchases. When Chicago still had their gun laws two gun shops just
            outside of the city was doing a really good business sell guns to criminals. About ten percent of the guns recovered by police were from them.

          3. gvette says:

            See Bob, over there on the left, you don’t get the same news I do. I like the ones that show, and prove you are so wrong. When bad guys break into a house, where the home owner has a gun, the bad guys get taken out on a stretcher. You can believe those lies. That’s all you on the left have, are lies!
            Oh hey, I’ve got some numbers for you.

            Former President Obama is not only leaving the U.S. government with a health care mess, but he leaves the country in deeper debt that when he took office eight years ago. According to data release by the U.S. Treasury, the outstanding national debt is now totaled at $19,944 trillion, which is an increase of $9.318 trillion.

            “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 124,248,000 people in the United States with full-time jobs in December. The total federal debt of $19,961,467,137,973 equals approximately $160,658 for each one of those workers. The $9,334,590,089,060.56 that the debt has increased under Obama equals $75,128.69 for each one of those works,” writes CNS News.

            To put this in a simpler perspective, the debt increased by 86%.

            So how did this happen?

            Medicare/Medicaid was the most expensive culprit and added $1.1 trillion to the national debt, then Social Security cost $900 billion. While, only $595 billion was spent on defense and war.

            Not to mention, the increase in regulations were extremely expensive and only halted economic growth.

            “The Obama administration put out 3,069 regulations, adding nearly $900 billion in costs to the economy. Obama’s main focuses were fighting global warming and immigration. Obama’s rules added nearly 572,000 pages to the Federal Register, including a whopping 97,110 pages in 2016 alone — an all-time record,” writes The Daily Caller.

            Obama’s predecessor, former President George W. Bush left office with an additional $4.9 trillion after his eight years, from the $5.7 trillion he inherited from Bill Clinton. This is half of the debt acquired at the end of Obama’s term.

            Many of those in favor of economic growth voted for President Trump. In David Horowitz’ recent book, “The Big Agenda: President Trump’s Plan to Save America,” he discusses the new president’s 100-day strategy which will boost the U.S. economy.

            “If you just say, ‘well we’re for free trade and we’re not going to look at the deals that we make’ — that’s not a good idea,” said Horowitz. “We’ve had an anti-business president now for eight years who doesn’t take a hard-nosed attitude towards these deals. Trump is going to get better deals for us, which is still free trade.”

            Change was definitely needed because if we were to have continued on the path Obama was on, the debt would have only increased.

            “Absent policy changes, the federal government’s fiscal path is unsustainable and that the debt-to-GDP ratio would surpass its historical high of 106 percent within 15 to 25 years,” according to the Government Accountability Office.

  • bobnstuff says:

    If the government is giving you money because you are mentally incompetent should you be able to buy a gun? To get that money you needed to prove you were mentally incompetent, you were seen by a doctor who determined that you were telling the truth that you were incompetent. So everyone agrees that someone is mentally incompetent and they should still be able to buy a gun without any problem. Maybe instead of just letting them buy the gun someone should look at the case and see if there is a problem. It shouldn’t take a year to review the case, fix that problem instead of just forgetting that they claim to be incompetent.

    1. Webb says:

      Regardless of what The Law States…
      We Understand how Government will Overreach any Law…Period!
      With Democrats there is always a reason to have Gun Control in every law they passed if possible!

      1. bobnstuff says:

        So keeping guns out of the hands of mentally incompetent people isn’t something you support. I love your regardless of what the law states bit. You don’t even know what it states you only know that the NRA doesn’t like it.

        1. Webb says:

          Bob,
          I do support keeping guns out of the hands anyone that has mental problems…But not a board law such as this was, it should be done on an individual basis only, by a Court Ruling!!
          These board laws become interpretation and overreach by government that’s fact.
          By The Way I am a free Thinker…But If The NRA doesn’t support this law that’s fine by me.

          1. bobnstuff says:

            As I said go look at the law before you decide if it’s good or bad. If you are getting money from SS because you are mentally incapacitated someone needed to apply for that money and a Doctor had to sign off. They don’t just take your word for it. The law effects about 1% of the people on SS so saying it a board law may be stretching it a bit. The only real problem is the appeal takes way to long.

    2. gvette says:

      I guess you forgot, older people draw their SS.

      1. bobnstuff says:

        I guess you didn’t read the ruling. It covers about 1% of people on SS.

        1. gvette says:

          When it’sscontrolled by the government, that’s to high.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative