Rep. Tom Emmer Introduces Firearm Due Process Protection Act

1 Comment

This is from The NRA-ILA.

We need to encourage our House members to co-sponsor this bill then vote for it.

On Tuesday, Representative Tom Emmer (R-MN) introduced H.R. 4980, the Firearm Due Process Protection Act. This legislation is meant to ensure that eligible firearms purchasers are not arbitrarily denied their right to obtain firearms. The Act would afford those who are denied a firearm purchase by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) an effective and expeditious means of correcting any misinformation that would erroneously cause such a result.

In January, we reported on the alarming news that the FBI had “temporarily” suspended work on processing appeals of denials issued by NICS. The backlog of pending appeals at the time stood at 7,100. As we noted in that article, FBI data from 2014 showed that some 5% of the denials rendered by NICS that year were later overturned on appeal, meaning 4,411 people who had initially been erroneously denied were later able to vindicate their rights.

Of course not every person who is wrongfully denied will necessarily wade through the considerable bureaucracy necessary to challenge that decision. And the FBI’s figures account only for NICS checks processed directly by the FBI and not by the 21 states that handle some or all of the firearm purchase background checks for their jurisdictions. Thus, the actual number of wrongful denials is undoubtedly much higher.

Current law does provide for an appeal process, but it does not establish deadlines for action on appeals or provide consequences for the FBI’s failure to act on them. Even before the FBI stopped processing NICS appeals altogether, the turnaround time for a decision could stretch from several months to more than a year. 

Rep. Emmers bill would address these problems in several ways. First, it would require the government to make a final determination on an appeal within 60 days after it received information in support of the claim. If the matter was not resolved within this timeframe, the individual would have the right to bring an action in federal court for a declaratory judgment on the person’s eligibility to receive and possess a firearm; a hearing would have to be held within 30 days after the action is brought.

If the government cannot establish the individual’s ineligibility at the hearing, the court would be required to issue an order for the government to correct or remove the erroneous records of NICS within five business days and to award the individual attorney’s fees and costs for the action.

Due process is a fundamental pillar of the American constitutional system. The purpose of Rep. Emmer’s bill is not to weaken NICS but to ensure that it functions as intended, blocking only legally prohibited individuals and not those who are misidentified or the victim of other bureaucratic mistakes.

As Rep. Emmer stated in introducing the bill, “Two months is a reasonable amount of time to run a background check and correct false information. Above all, citizens must always have recourse when denied a fundamental right.”

The NRA commends Rep. Emmer’s leadership in this important effort and urges swift consideration of the bill by the U.S. House of Representatives.


Granny’s Got a Gun: More Seniors Now Purchasing Firearms

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.

We seniors are too crippled up to run, too old and do not heal up as fast to take an Ass Whooping.

So it just leaves us with one option and that is to shoot your dumbass.

If you thought the elderly’s weapon of choice was their knitting needle, think again. A growing trend reveals that today’s senior citizens are taking advantage of their Second Amendment rights just as much as younger generations.

One gun store in Georgia, Sandy Springs Gun Club and Range, has seen an influx of senior citizens eager to get their hands on firearms. Sandy Springs records show a 30 percent increase among seniors buying guns, or showing up for target practice. Even more telling are statistics from Dekalb County which show that out of 1,800 gun applications, 244 were over 55 years old.

Sandy Springs owner Mike Mers, for one, is not surprised by the trend.

“They watch the news, they see crime, they like to protect themselves,” he said. “So we’re seeing an increase across all age ranges.”

Why do these seniors feel the need to pack some heat? Because of favorable concealed carry laws and, more importantly, because they’re often easy targets for intruders looking for vulnerable victims.

The increase in senior firearms purchases comes at a period when the White House has announced plans to scale back Second Amendment rights for those who need help with Social Security. Under the provision, seniors unable to handle the benefits of their own accord would be placed on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the reasoning being that those with mental illness should not be in possession of a firearm. Some argue, however, that just because a senior needs help with paperwork doesn’t disqualify them from owning a gun.

The need for self-defense transcends age. Kudos to seniors for being proactive about keeping their families and their homes safe. I’d think any criminal would think twice before messing with a grandmother who had a Glock in her closet.

Bloomberg Group Lies About Charleston Church Shooting To Push Gun Control Scheme

Leave a comment

This is from Bearing Arms.

Which story is correct the system failed to stop Dylann Roof,or according to the U. K. Daily Mail Dylann’s father bought the gun for him?

Is the story of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System failing a false flag to take away our Second Amendment rights?

Nanny Bloomberg and his band of miscreants are a bunch of ghouls dancing on the graves of dead people to promote their totalitarian agenda.

t takes a special kind of ghoul to shamelessly stand on the bodies of the dead to lie in service of a political agency, but billionaire totalitarian Michael Bloomberg is just that kind of ghoul:

Everytown for Gun Safety is pushing for legislation that would close a loophole supported by the National Rifle Association that allows people with incomplete background checks to purchase guns after three business days.

A similar bill, authored by Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), aims to stop retailers from selling guns to people with incomplete background checks, as was the case when alleged Charleston shooter Dylann Roof purchased his firearm.

The prospects of a bill getting through the GOP-controlled Congress appear bleak.

The prospects are bleak for the legislation because the “loophole” is a media myth, on numerous levels.

As we noted in our initial report yesterday, the NICS background check system didn’t fail. Based upon what the FBI director has made public, there were two failure points.

Multiple Data Entry Failures

At  the local level, for reasons that still remain unclear, the wrong arresting agency was listed for the suspect’s drug charge.

This  data entry was compounded when because the list of law enforcement agencies in South Carolina used by NICS in their investigations was incorrect due to another data entry error.

ATF Retrieval Failure

When I worked retail in a gun shop, we once had a customer who was delayed, and who later returned to pick up his firearm after the three-day deplay period had expired. NICS determined the following day that he should have been considered a prohibited person, and sent ATF agents to our store to pull his form 4473, and then went to retrieve the firearm within 48 hours.

In this instance in south Carolina, the suspect waited five days—nearly doubling the amount of time investigators had to investigate his history—before picking up the handgun, on April 16, 2015.

62 days after picking up his firearm, and 67 days after submitting his information to the FBI NICS, the killer carried out his attack.

Where was the breakdown between NICS and the ATF that allowed more than two months to pass without the killer being targeted for a gun retrieval?

There is nothing wrong with the existing implementation of the NICS system.

What we had here is a all-too-human data entry error that seems to have originated in South Carolina law enforcement, and an even more worrying failure of communication between NICS and the ATF.

So why are Bloomberg’s attack dogs lying about about the horrific events in Charleston?

The three day limit was put in place to ensure that duplicitous anti-liberty political administrations could not game the system in order to create de facto gun sales bans. If the NICS Operation Center did not have a statutory time limit to investigate delays, an anti-gun Executive Branch could slow the system down or even close it entirely by reallocating or minimizing NICS staff so that approvals slowed to a crawl. Instead of approvals taking just three days, we could see them taking nine months or more as they sometimes have on Title II (NFA) firearms… if at all.

The “Charleston loophole” is an attempt to create a problem where one didn’t exist, then exploit that imaginary problem to reduce lawful gun sales for law-abiding citizens in the future, without any impediment at all to those sick and twisted individuals who want to hurt other human beings.

Bloomberg and him band of serially-dishonest spin merchants at Moms Demand Action, Everytown, and the Trace may excite their tiny base of fact-starved fans, but they’ll continue to politically alienate themselves from Democrats, Independents,  and Republicans alike with their bitter dishonesty.


Rep. Steve Scalise Introduces Bill to Relax Restrictions on Interstate Firearm Sales

1 Comment

This is from AmmoLand.

This is a good piece of legislation I hope it passes.

We know that Obozo the clown will veto the bill.

Fairfax, VA -( Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) has introduced a bill to modernize certain aspects of interstate firearms commerce.

The Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act, H.R. 2246, would yield increased convenience and choice for consumers, while continuing to allow states to set their own policy regarding transfer and possession of firearms within their borders.

In 1968, when the federal Gun Control Act (GCA) was enacted, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and today’s sophisticated computer technology did not exist, and what background checks were run on gun sales occurred at the state or local level. Recognizing that state approaches to gun laws varied, Congress enacted a nationwide system of licensing for those engaged in the business of firearm commerce and generally prohibited licensed dealers from selling guns to out of state residents or shipping guns directly to unlicensed buyers.

The 1968 law contained limited exceptions for interstate sale of rifles or shotguns. Specifically, the buyer`s state had to have a law allowing such transactions. Second, the transaction had to comply with the state law in both the buyer`s and seller`s states. Third, the dealer had to notify the chief law enforcement officer in the buyer`s state, and wait for evidence that the officer had received the notification. Finally, the dealer had to wait seven days after receiving the notice before completing the transfer. These requirements were intended to keep buyers from leaving their home states to evade whatever sort of background check might be required under state law.

In the 1980s, the Congress revisited these restrictions during the debate over the Firearms Owners` Protection Act (FOPA). As the Senate Judiciary Committee`s report on FOPA put it, the 1968 interstate sales provisions were “so cumbersome that they [were] rarely used.” When the Congress passed FOPA in 1986, it did away with the state authorization, notification and waiting period requirements. Federal law now allows dealers to make interstate rifle and shotgun sales, as long as: (a) the buyer meets in person with the dealer, and (b) the transaction complies with the laws of both the buyer`s and the seller`s states.

Since 1998, however, all people buying firearms from licensed dealers anywhere in the U.S. have been subject to computerized background checks under the FBI`s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), either by the dealer contacting NICS (directly or through a state “point of contact” agency) or by the buyer presenting a state firearms permit issued after a NICS check. NICS, moreover, is a national system that collects records from every state and makes those records available to every other state. Thus, even if a person leaves a state where some disabling conviction, commitment, or order was entered, any records reported to the databases encompassed by the NICS system will show up through a NICS check in any other state.

This means that even if a person buys a firearm from an FFL out of state, that FFL’s NICS check will also be able to screen for disqualifying records from the person’s home state. This makes a limitation on buying only from FFL’s in one’s own state unnecessary.

Under H.R. 2246, FFLs could sell both handguns and long guns to unlicensed residents from other states, but the transfer would still have to occur in a face-to-face transaction (in other words, no mail order sales to non-licensees), and it would still have to comply with the laws of the state of the buyer’s residence. Thus, a buyer could not go out of a state to buy a firearm banned in the buyer’s state of residence, and any prohibited person provisions, waiting periods, or other requirements specific to the buyer’s state of residence would still apply.

The bill would also allow FFLs to sell firearms at gun shows in other states, so long as they complied with the laws both of the state of transfer and of the buyer’s state of residence. All other rules governing retail sales by FFLs – including the paperwork, identification, and NICS requirements – would continue to apply.

Finally, the bill would recognize the realities that military members face in having to make frequent moves to duty stations throughout the U.S. and abroad. It would clarify that service members and their spouses are residents, for purposes of the GCA, of their state of legal residence, of the state in which the member’s permanent duty station is located, and of the state in which the member maintains a place of abode from which the member commutes each day to the permanent duty station. Civilian employees of federal agencies such as the State Department who are stationed overseas for long periods would also benefit, as the bill would effectively allow them to buy firearms in the U.S. during trips back home to their U.S. state of residence.

It’s high time Congress recognizes that today’s systems of interstate commerce and information sharing are far more advanced and well-developed than in the late 1960s, and federal regulation of firearms sales (products that are legal and constitutionally-protected in every state) should keep pace with these developments.

The NRA thanks Rep. Scalise for his leadership in this important effort.

About the NRA-ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Read more:
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

After Gun Dealer Threatens to Sue, Bloomberg Group Issues Correction

1 Comment

This is from The Blaze.

If there is a case I would like to see Crossfire Arms follow through with their lawsuit.


The Michael Bloomberg-financed Everytown for Gun Safety issued a correction to one of its reports after a Vermont gun dealer said he was considering suing over the allegation that he was selling guns online without conducting background checks, and a pro-gun website found faulty information.

Last week’s report originally asserted that more than 1,000 online gun ads in Vermont were from unlicensed dealers, and thus not conducting criminal background checks. But on Thursday, Everytown for Gun Safety acknowledged it had incorrectly identified 49 licensed gun dealers in Vermont as unlicensed.

 This Jan. 17, 2013 file photo shows Michael Kiefer of DeFuniak Springs, Fla., checking out a display of rifles at the Rock River Arms booth during the 35th annual SHOT Show in Las Vegas. Fresh off a victory in Washington state, a leading gun control group, Everytown for Gun Safety, has targeted Oregon as the next prize in a campaign to require all gun sales go through background checks to keep them from criminals, the mentally ill and domestic abusers. (AP Photo/Julie Jacobson)

Before the Bloomberg group conceded misidentifying the 49 gun sellers, the pro-gun reported that at least six of the gun sellers named in the report for advertising online were in fact federally licensed firearms dealers. Among those licensed dealers incorrectly listed was Crossfire Arms in Mount Holly, Vermont.

Crossfire Arms owner Bobby Richards told Bearing Arms that he was exploring whether to file a suit against the Bloomberg group for accusing his business of violating federal law.

Richards advertises firearms on Armslist, a Cragistlist-type website for buying guns. Every gun photo he posts on Armslist bears a Crossfire Arms company logo, and some of those images were cited in Everytown’s report. Richards said he requires every purchaser of a gun he sells to on Armslist to complete a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Form 4473 and be screened by the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS.

Everytown’s full correction states:

“A previous version of this report incorrectly stated that we identified 1,106 ads posted by unlicensed Vermont sellers offering firearms for sale. We inadvertently included 49 ads posted by licensed dealers in Vermont in this total. This version of the report reflects data based on the updated total of 1,058 gun ads posted by unlicensed sellers, which yields an estimate of 2,926 unlicensed gun sales annually on just three websites in Vermont, including 121 gun sales to felons and domestic abusers.”

Both Politifact and took Everytown for Gun Safety to task last year for repeating the misleading statistic that there had been 74 school shooting since the Sandy Hook massacre.

Americans Don’t Think ‘Universal Background Checks’ Extension for Gun Shows Are Needed, National Poll Finds

1 Comment

This is from the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

It seems the crap sandwich touted Sen. Joe Manchin (D.W.V.).

and Sen. Pat Toomey (RINO, Pa) is not popular.

It seems only 40% of Americans approve of it.

Yet Sen. Joe Manchin (D.W.V.).  wants us to think it is a 

popular crap sandwich.

Only four out of ten Americans support so-called “universal background checks” at gun shows after being informed that the vast majority of firearms sales at these shows are transacted by licensed retailers that already conduct such checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as required by federal law. The poll results stand in contrast to the vague claim often reported in the media and attributed to gun control proponents without important contextual detail that 90 percent of Americans surveyed support “universal background checks.”

 links to hi-res JPG 

These findings were the among the results of a national scientific poll of more than 1,200 Americans conducted in November by McKeon & Associates and released today by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. The McKeon poll found that only 40 percent of respondents said that extension of “universal background checks” to private transactions at gun shows are necessary, while 53 percent said they are not necessary and 7% said they did not know.

links to hi-res JPGThe Americans polled also said by a combined 74 percent margin that conducting background checks against an incomplete database was not effective at all or not very effective while 54 percent said that requiring background checks for transferring guns between friends and family members was not at effective at all or not very effective in reducing violent crime.

The poll also discovered that 92 percent of Americans agree that the states should submit all records of persons federally prohibited from owning a firearm to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check Systems (NICS), passing legislation if needed.

“We commissioned this poll to help determine where Americans stood on the various aspects of how the NICS system actually works today,” said Larry G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “When properly informed of relevant details, it turns out that only four out of ten, not nine out of ten Americans support so-called ‘universal background checks’ at gun shows or for firearms transfers. The poll also found that Americans want a National Instant Criminal Background Check System with a dependable and accurate database, which supports the goal of the FixNICS initiative we launched in 2013 and will continue in 2014.”

links to hi-res JPGThe poll conducted Nov. 6-7 has a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percent. Respondents self-identified as 33 percent Democrat, 26 percent Republican and 41 percent independent. As to ethnicity, 62 percent of respondents said they were Caucasian, 18 percent African-American, 11 percent Hispanic; and 9 percent, other. As to age, 20 percent of respondents said they were 18-30; 36 percent, 31-45; 23 percent 46-60; and 21 percent, 60 or older.

Former Australian Official Blames Murder on the NRA


This is from Godfather Politics.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer is using a the 

Liberal playbook blaming the NRA and guns.

Australia has enacted draconian gun control measures yet the 

murder rate has not dropped.

The amount of guns being smuggled into Australia is in the thousands. 


As expected, to deflect attention away from the real story behind the murder of Australian baseball player Chris Lane by three young thugs, some liberal pundits are blaming the NRA and a lack of “gun control” in the United States. Even the former Australian deputy prime minister Tim Fischer is following a script written by liberal pundits in the United States:

“This is the bitter harvest and legacy of the policies of the NRA that even blocked background checks for people buying guns at gunshows. People should take this into account before going to the United States. I am deeply angry about this because of the callous attitude of the three teenagers (but) it’s a sign of the proliferation of guns on the ground in the USA.

There is a gun for almost every American.” I realize that the murder of a young man who was minding his own business in a country that was not his own is a tragedy that can’t be salved over with rational argumentation. Emotional reactions are to be expected.

What Mr. Fischer does not know is “that the alleged shooters were in breach of state law by possessing guns in the first place and were not capable of passing national background checks already on the books.” Criminals don’t care about laws. That’s why they’re criminals.

Any person who will pull out a gun a shoot someone “for the fun of it” because he and his friends were “bored” is not going to care anything about background checks, gun registration, or possessing guns obtained illegally.

Awr Hawkins writing for Breitbart points out: “Oklahoma law states that an individual ‘must be 18 years of age to possess any weapon, except rifles or shotguns used in education, hunting, or sport.’

Yet the two teens charged with first degree murder in Lane’s death were only 15 and 16 years old.” ***** “In addition to violating Oklahoma’s law on possession of a firearm, individuals 15, 16, or 17 could never pass the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) in place now. The NICS system has been in place since Bill Clinton’s presidency.”

Those responsible for the murder of Mr. Lane were the three young men who decided it would be fun to shoot somebody in the back. Somebody had to pick up the gun, put bullets in it, carry it to the scene, aim it, and pull the trigger. You can’t blame the NRA for that.



Feds to Force States to Surrender Mental Health Records

Leave a comment

This is from The Truth About Guns. 

 I am currently getting treatment for PTSD and Depression.

I have been carrying for years even before being diagnosed 

with PTSD and Depression.

I never threatened of killed anyone.

I have carried a handgun for almost forty yeaerrs.




Hartheim Castle (courtesy

“Any regulatory change wouldn’t require congressional approval.” That’s the word from the spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS), an agency created by the framers of the United States Constitution to fulfill Americans’ constitutional right to health care. Not. One wonders what said Founding Fathers would make of a federal fiat that forces state mental-health authorities to “transmit records of anyone who has been declared mentally unfit by a court or other authority to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” You know; so they can be permanently disqualified from firearms purchases. Without due process. Without an appeals system. Hello? Did I wake up in Soviet Russia this morning? The thing is . . .


Like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (and Really Big Fires) the HHS considers the law of the land a relatively minor impediment to their sacred work of protecting the public from disease, death and yes, terrorism. In this case, the HHS is raising a middle finger to the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996.

Or is it? If you thought the Act protected your health records from governmentspying investigation, I don’t think HIPAA means what you think it means. Check out this description of HIPPA’s Privacy Rule from the Centers for Disease Control.

The new regulations provide protection for the privacy of certain individually identifiable health data, referred to as protected health information (PHI). Balancing the protection of individual health information with the need to protect public health, the Privacy Rule expressly permits disclosures without individual authorization to public health authorities authorized by law to collect or receive the information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability, including but not limited to public health surveillance, investigation, and intervention.

Public health practice often requires the acquisition, use, and exchange of PHI to perform public health activities (e.g., public health surveillance, program evaluation, terrorism preparedness, outbreak investigations, direct health services, and public health research). Such information enables public health authorities to implement mandated activities (e.g., identifying, monitoring, and responding to death, disease, and disability among populations) and accomplish public health objectives. Public health authorities have a long history of respecting the confidentiality of PHI, and the majority of states as well as the federal government have laws that govern the use of, and serve to protect, identifiable information collected by public health authorities.

See how easy that is? We need your mental health medical records to protect the public. Now give us the damn records so we can stop people who’ve been committed (i.e. treated) for mental illness from purchasing firearms. Or getting a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Or openly carrying a gun. Or possessing a firearm. Or living with someone who possess a firearm.

Once again, we can see that government is the problem, not the solution. Well I can see it. And so can the mental health care industry, which is savvy enough to view the records transfer as counterproductive.

The National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, the representative for state mental-health agencies, said in a June 7 letter to HHS that the proposal would only serve “to exacerbate the stigma faced by people with mental illnesses and could potentially have a significant chilling effect” on their resolve to seek help.

The American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association,and the American Psychological Association expressed similar reservations in separate letters. All are the largest professional organizations in their respective fields.

Federal gun laws prohibit dealers from selling guns to people deemed be “mentally defective.” But few states have contributed the mental-health records needed to make that prohibition meaningful.

“Meaningful.” Where’s the evidence that adding the names of mentally ill people to the FBI’s NICS system will do anything to reduce killing sprees? Lest we forget, Adam Lanza shot his mother in the head, twice, to gain access to her legall purchased firearms.

We’d do well to heed the medical professionals’ [implied] prediction that the new regulation could drive madmen underground, away from treatment, creating more deadly armed attacks. And that’s not the worst of it . . .

At the risk of evoking Godwin’s Law, it’s worth noting that the Nazis “warmed-up” for their mass extermination campaign by sterilizing and then euthanizing the mentally ill. [NB: the U.S. forcibly sterilized mental patients before the Germans as part of America’s fascination with eugenics.] Of course all of these victims were disarmed before they were mutilated and murdered. Now what does that tell you?

It tells me that if ever there was a glide path down a slippery slope to a place my father barely survived, this forthcoming HHS ruling is it. But then, that’s just me. Right?


Obama Administration Trying to Grab Guns Through Executive Order

Leave a comment

This is from Ammoland.

Attention My Fellow Patriots.

We are going to become victims of Obamacare.

Please go to the links below and made your voice heard.



Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC-( “Gun Owners of America [has] spent the months since Newtown doing tremendous damage, insisting that expanded background checks will lead to a gun registry.” – New York Times, April 4, 2013

It’s quite a complement when the New York Times thinks that you are doing “tremendous damage.”  But you can be sure that the other side is not going to go away quietly.

And sure enough, the Obama Administration is trying to unilaterally undo our recent victory in the Senate – and to undo the “damage” that all of us inflicted together.

But first, a little history.

Remember when Senators Pat Toomey, Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer formed an unholy alliance during the recent gun battle on Capitol Hill?  Remember how their amendment would have encouraged your psychiatrist to turn you in to the FBI’s gun ban list?

And you remember how we stopped that provision, because over 40 senators found it to be odious and a violation of the Second Amendment?

Well, guess what?  Barack Obama has just concluded that “he don’t need no stinkin’ Senate.”

Instead, Secretary Kathleen ObamaCare Sebelius – and her Department of Health and Human Services – has promulgated regulations which would, by executive fiat, waive all federal privacy laws and encourage you doctor to report you to the FBI.

Understand a couple of things:  First, the standard which your doctor would use to turn you in is embodied in Clinton-era ATF language and in the anti-gun Veterans Disarmament Act of 2007. Specifically, you doctor would “drop a dime” on you if he suspected you were even a slight “danger to yourself of others” or were “unable to manage your financial affairs.”

So if they say you can’t balance your checkbook, then you lose your constitutional rights.

But there’s another problem:  The day these regulations become law, lawyers will be lining up to sue “deep-pocket” psychiatrists for every case where they failed to turn in a patient to NICS – if the patient subsequently engages in a horrific act.

The bottom line?  Any psychiatrist who failed to report all of his patients to the NICS system risks losing everything if any of them engages in harmful conduct.  Soon the rule of thumb will be: See a shrink; lose your guns.

And the regulations will apply to private, as well as government-employed psychiatrists.

The bad news is that 165,000 military veterans have already lost their gun rights because of the “see a VA shrink, lose your gun rights” precedent from the Clinton-Bush era.

Sadly, what happened to military veterans has now begun in the private sector – especially in places like New York, after they recently passed their misnamed SAFE Act.

According to gun rights reporter, Dan Roberts, firearms are now being confiscated from gun owners because of their mental health information. For example:

“[John Doe] received a letter from the Pistol Permit Department informing him that his license was immediately revoked upon information that he was seeing a therapist for anxiety and had been prescribed an anxiety drug. He was never suicidal, never violent, and has no criminal history.”

So now taking anxiety pills can result in one’s forfeiting their Second Amendment rights in New York!

This is where the gun haters want to push their agenda.  And this is one reason why background checks are so dangerous – because they give government bureaucrats the opportunity to deny law-abiding people their constitutionally-protected rights.

But the good news is this:  The HHS rulemaking is still at an early stage, and HHS is (no doubt reluctantly) taking the views of the general public.

ACTION: Go to the Federal Register – at – and respond to the regs entitled “HIPAA Privacy Rule and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).”

Let the HHS know how you feel about waiving all federal privacy laws for people who seek counseling.

You may submit your comments at

Also, be sure to tell your congressmen that you oppose the “see a shrink, lose your guns” regs issued by the HHS.  Ask him to issue his own comments as well.

The regs themselves lay out several ways that you may submit your opposition.  The comment period ends on June 7, 2013.

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585
FAX: 703-321-8408

About:Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul Visit: to Join.



Disabled Vietnam Vet Denied Weapon Purchase In Background Check Debacle

Leave a comment

This is from Freedom Outpost.


So the RINO‘s in the Senate think the expanded background

checks are a good thing,

The current background system is flawed. 

Additional background checks will foul it up even more.

 The term SNAFU comes to mind.


Disabled Vietnam Veteran, award winning author and contributor to Freedom Outpost Leon Puissegur was turned down for the purchase of a weapon he was going to use for hog hunting by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The peculiar thing about the denial was that it was based on an incident that never happened, but since the denial more fabricated charges have come up in the NICS system against Mr. Puissegur. If you are considering supporting stricter background checks, I suggest you read the problems these can cause for law abiding citizens, including veterans.

In a phone interview with Puissegur, he told Freedom Outpost, “Our government wants a more robust background check. Yet, they seem to have a very serious problem just doing a normal background check.”


Apparently, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) thinks it is always right no matter what and even if the records cannot be found due to dismissal or due to the fact that the charge the FBI states has happened is a false charge.


Puissegur says that he went to Academy Sports and Outdoors to purchase his weapon back in November 2012, a place where he had purchased another weapon just a year prior without incident. At that time, after filling out the paperwork and the salesman calling into NICS, he was denied the purchase and given a number to call and find out why he was denied.


According to Puissegur, “I made the call as soon as I got home and know that nothing had changed since my purchase in 2011.”


He listened as a recording proceeded to explain the reason for denial, which he said didn’t apply to him, so he waited to speak to a real person. The man who answered repeated the same things that the recording had and told Mr. Puissegur that he could not reveal what record kept him from purchasing a weapon because “he could not be certain that Puissegur was Puissegur.” Fair enough.


Puissegur, in order to prove his identity and demand an answer, pays $20 to be fingerprinted to gain access to the FBI records concerning his alleged charges. He sent in the information that he was supposed to and approximately a month later received a phone call from Sherrie Ash with NICS. Ms. Ash informed him that he had a “possession of marijuana” arrest on his record from 1972. That’s over four decades ago! Puissegur informed Ash that he has never been arrested for anything remotely like that in his life. However, Ash told Puissegur that he would have to clear that before he would be allowed to purchase a weapon.


How is Leon supposed to clear a record that does not exist, except in a NICS database? I ask the question because not only did he drive76 miles to New Orleans to get a complete background check which did not show any record and forward that on, but the plot thickens. He sent in the Certified New Orleans background check to NICS and also obtained an additional copy which he sent to his United States Senator David Vitter to investigate.


According to Puissegur, “It was just this past Friday that I got a response from the FBI and even they admitted that they have no ‘sentencing data,’ but they still did not clear the files.”


“The response was not what I had hoped for,” Puissegur continued, “after all I sent them certified documentation from the very office the FBI claimed to have the information from. What is different now is that the FBI now states that the State has the records of an arrest for ‘exposing of person.’ Those charges were dismissed so that should not matter, and even the lady admitted that since those charges were dismissed, they did not matter. But now the FBI claims it has no data of an arrest made by New Orleans Police for the possession of marijuana.”


Puissegur added, “Now the FBI says the State of Louisiana has matched fingerprints of the arrest, when before I sent the documentation it was just the New Orleans Police Department and the Criminal Clerk of Court. Apparently the FBI has now enlarged the field at their own making.”


Indeed it appears that the FBI did enlarge the field to include a false report from the State of Louisiana. The FBI even freely admits that neither case had sentencing, which is correct because one case was dismissed and the other never existed. Since there was no sentencing and the FBI admits this, why are they not removing it from their system, instead of demanding an innocent veteran have to prove his innocence? After all, this man fought for this country that is supposed to uphold equal protection under the law and where you are to be assumed innocent until proven guilty.


Mr. Puissegur responded to a letter from the FBI in which he asked, “Please explain just how I clear a record that just does not exist?”


Puissegur says that he is looking to make another 76 mile trip to New Orleans to file lawsuit in the Fifth Circuit Court in order to move this into the realm of the courts to get justice. Though he believes he is 100% in the right, he is not confident that the FBI will clear his record and allow him to purchase a weapon.


This is a prime example of what gun control legislation does. It impacts law abiding citizens, including those that have served our country with honor. It is unconstitutional and is clearly infringing upon Mr. Puissegur’s Second Amendment rights. It is not Puissegur who is out of line. It’s a tyrannical Federal government that has stuck its nose in a jurisdiction it has no authority to be in and it should be removed from such.


Puissegur is also open to any attorneys that might wish to help him in his lawsuit as he lives on a fixed income as a disabled Vietnam veteran.


The irony in this is the same system gave him a green light to purchase a weapon just one year ago and now they claim he cannot purchase a weapons due to something that happened over forty years ago.


This should make you pause and consider when the Federal government wants to impose stricter background checks. They don’t prevent criminals from obtaining guns, but they most certainly infringe on law abiding citizens’ right to privacy and the right to keep and bear arms, or in this case purchase them.


If this outrages you, let the higher ups hear from you. Here’s the various contact information. – NICS Agent that first discussed the false charge.
304-625-7469 – Ms. Ash’s Supervisor


Senator David Vitter’s office at Washington, D.C. – 1-202-224-4623
Senator Vitter’s Office in Metairie, LA. – 1-504-589-2753
Email him here.


Jeremy M. Wiltz
Federal Bureau of Investigations
Deputy Assistant Director
Information Services Branch
CJIS Division
1000 Custer Hollow Road
Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306-0001

Read more:


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: