Catch 22: Vets Fear Loss Of Gun Rights If They Seek Treatment For PTSD - Breitbart

SSG Jay OConnor based on your words above, it reads as though you see no restriction to firearms would be constitutional? Is that correct?
If you feel otherwise please tell us when such loss of right would be allowed in your opinion.

"They will be vented"
Well played, Sir. Well played.

SGM Erik Marquez - First off, Having PTSD does not mean Crazy, as many would think. The only ones that should not be allowed carry are people who have had violent criminal charges because obviously they have a propensity for violence.

PTSD doesn't mean crazy. Mental health issues covers PTSD, TBI, and a slew of other issues that veterans are treated for that fall under mental health. That caveat well limit the ability to purchase and/or keep fire arms

thanks, Top. Didn't see that before. My point was in counter to your drug addict line, most of whom are convicted felons. And I was trying to impress that even with the new laws, that have not been passed yet, a warrant would be necessary to enter a person's home to take the guns, ensuring due process.

SGT Edward Wilcox - I was not saying that the person WAS a drug addict, simply that they went to seek addiction treatment and somebody assumes that they are an addict, or by extension as you did, that substance treatment = felon = no guns for you.
My problem with the TWL being used in this manner is that it treats someone who has not been convicted, nor tried, nor charged, nor even investigated in order to establish if they are in fact a terrorist exactly the same as a felon who has been tried and convicted.
That is not what right looks like, and I am confident that the courts would see it that way too.

1SG (Join to see) - My last response: If someone seeks addiction treatment, they are an addict. There is simply no other reason why one would seek treatment for an addiction, if it didn't exist. Being an addict does not automatically equal felon, although most in treatment are already felons. And it takes more than just someone's word to get on the watch list. There is, at the very least, an investigation. Typically, the person's name comes up during the course of another investigation. While there have been cases of people getting names on the list to spite someone else, it is not the norm.

SGT Edward Wilcox - Anything that does not have transparency is fundamentally suspect. It is arbitrary to be placed on the list, and that is wrong.

I don't understand why people don't get that.

SGT Justin Anderson - The herd mentality. Being many don't like Obama for whatever reason, and a chance to really stick it to him comes up, some will take it, and if the right person does like on FB, the whole herd sucks it in as fact. Even when you show them from multiple angles how it's wrong, you're wrong and the site admin being a retired SNCO keeps it going against you.

Everyone knows a guy that knows a guy that something happen to or like you said just following the crowd. It's not really rocket science to go down to the VA, local government office, or library and look up the information. I was concerned about myself being allowed firearms after going to therapy. I asked the doc and they gave the answer. I stopped worrying.