FASCISM Joe Biden Proposes Reviving Obama Social Security Gun Ban

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
www.breitbart.com /politics/2020/10/22/joe-biden-proposals-include-reviving-obama-social-security-gun-ban/

Joe Biden Proposes Reviving Obama Social Security Gun Ban
AWR Hawkins
3-4 minutes


Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden’s gun control proposals could mean reviving the Obama gun ban that barred certain Social Security recipients from buying firearms.

The Social Security gun ban was an Obama-era policy which targeted benefit recipients who needed help managing their finances. On July 18, 2015, the Los Angeles Times reported that the ban would be sweeping; that it would cover those who are unable to manage their own affairs for a multitude of reasons–from “subnormal intelligence or mental illness” to “incompetency,” an unspecified “condition,” or “disease.”

Breitbart News reported that the policy was finalized by the Obama Social Security Administration on December 19, 2016, weeks after Donald Trump won the presidential election, and just over a month before he was to be sworn into office.

Republicans focused on repealing the ban early in the Trump presidency. On February 12, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Duke University psychiatry and behavioral science professor Jeffrey Swanson believed Congress was right to repeal Barack Obama’s Social Security gun ban. Swanson suggested the ban targeted the “vulnerable” rather than the dangerous.

Swanson used a Washington Post column to explain the ban, saying, “Social Security beneficiaries with psychiatric disabilities who are assigned a money manager for their disability benefits would be reported to the FBI’s background check database as people ineligible to purchase firearms.” He noted that “the mental health conditions in question might range from moderate intellectual disabilities to depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia,” and then pointed to academic work showing that “the vast majority of mentally ill individuals” are not violent or suicidal.

On February 28, 2017, Trump signed legislation to do away with the ban.

Biden’s campaign website indicates that, if elected, he will revive the ban that targeted certain Social Security recipients.

The website says:

Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. In 2016, the Obama-Biden Administration finalized a rule to make sure the Social Security Administration (SSA) sends to the background check system records that it holds of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms because they have been adjudicated by the SSA as unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons. But one of the first actions Donald Trump took as president was to reverse this rule. President Biden will enact legislation to codify this policy.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News, the host of the Breitbart podcast Bullets with AWR Hawkins, and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
This is actually possibly defensible for once, unusual for an Obama action.
You're kidding, right? I get that you feel that anyone with a sub-100 IQ is inferior to you, and you see them as subhuman, but fortunately, our Constitution does not. And unless or until they are CONVICTED of a violent felony, they have the same God-guven RIGHT to keep and bear arms for their own self defense as their "betters".

Summerthyme
 

dawnbringr

Veteran Member
Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. In 2016, the Obama-Biden Administration finalized a rule to make sure the Social Security Administration (SSA) sends to the background check system records that it holds of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms because they have been adjudicated by the SSA as unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons. But one of the first actions Donald Trump took as president was to reverse this rule. President Biden will enact legislation to codify this policy.

Social Security doesn't adjudicate shit in terms of someone's well-being.
 

MinnesotaSmith

Has No Life - Lives on TB
You're kidding, right? I get that you feel that anyone with a sub-100 IQ is inferior to you, and you see them as subhuman, but fortunately, our Constitution does not. And unless or until they are CONVICTED of a violent felony, they have the same God-guven RIGHT to keep and bear arms for their own self defense as their "betters".

Summerthyme
So, you think 60 IQ people longterm taking multiple psychoactive medications to keep their schizophrenia partially under control should own firearms, drive on the Interstate Highways, vote, serve on juries trying capital crimes or Constitutional cases, marry and produce children that they raise, etc. We're going to differ on that one. P.S. 60 years ago, in a clearly freer, healthier U.S., those sorts mostly didn't get to do those, typically being restrained in some way. Now, they're apparently considered heroic and a potential voting bloc for the Democrats. Interesting...
 
Last edited:

Iowa Wiley

Contributing Member
www.breitbart.com /politics/2020/10/22/joe-biden-proposals-include-reviving-obama-social-security-gun-ban/

Joe Biden Proposes Reviving Obama Social Security Gun Ban
AWR Hawkins
3-4 minutes


Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden’s gun control proposals could mean reviving the Obama gun ban that barred certain Social Security recipients from buying firearms.

The Social Security gun ban was an Obama-era policy which targeted benefit recipients who needed help managing their finances. On July 18, 2015, the Los Angeles Times reported that the ban would be sweeping; that it would cover those who are unable to manage their own affairs for a multitude of reasons–from “subnormal intelligence or mental illness” to “incompetency,” an unspecified “condition,” or “disease.”

Breitbart News reported that the policy was finalized by the Obama Social Security Administration on December 19, 2016, weeks after Donald Trump won the presidential election, and just over a month before he was to be sworn into office.

Republicans focused on repealing the ban early in the Trump presidency. On February 12, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Duke University psychiatry and behavioral science professor Jeffrey Swanson believed Congress was right to repeal Barack Obama’s Social Security gun ban. Swanson suggested the ban targeted the “vulnerable” rather than the dangerous.

Swanson used a Washington Post column to explain the ban, saying, “Social Security beneficiaries with psychiatric disabilities who are assigned a money manager for their disability benefits would be reported to the FBI’s background check database as people ineligible to purchase firearms.” He noted that “the mental health conditions in question might range from moderate intellectual disabilities to depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia,” and then pointed to academic work showing that “the vast majority of mentally ill individuals” are not violent or suicidal.

On February 28, 2017, Trump signed legislation to do away with the ban.

Biden’s campaign website indicates that, if elected, he will revive the ban that targeted certain Social Security recipients.

The website says:

Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. In 2016, the Obama-Biden Administration finalized a rule to make sure the Social Security Administration (SSA) sends to the background check system records that it holds of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms because they have been adjudicated by the SSA as unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons. But one of the first actions Donald Trump took as president was to reverse this rule. President Biden will enact legislation to codify this policy.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News, the host of the Breitbart podcast Bullets with AWR Hawkins, and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.
Biden should start with himself.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
So, you think it's okay to take people's Constitutional rights away without a crime having been committed? (And only the first in your list is a Constitutional right.) Methinks China or NoKo is the best country for you.

So, you think 60 IQ people longterm taking multiple psychoactive medications to keep their schizophrenia partially under control should own firearms, drive on the Interstate Highways, vote, serve on juries trying capital crimes or Constitutional cases, marry and produce children that they raise, etc. We're going to differ on that one.
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
Straw man bullsh!t. I don't care WHAT issues they have, as long as they've been able to keep their demons under control and behaved within the confines of our laws, YES, regardless of their psychiatric diagnoses or IQ, if they can pass the drivers test, they can drive. And IF they can properly care for children, it's their human right to have them.

Yes, there will be instances where the outcome is less than ideal, but we see that in "normal" people as well.

Summerthyme
 

MinnesotaSmith

Has No Life - Lives on TB
So, you think it's okay to take people's Constitutional rights away without a crime having been committed? (And only the first in your list is a Constitutional right.) Methinks China or NoKo is the best country for you.
People like the one I described would not routinely get to do those things in any country lacking a death wish. I thought the Constitution wasn't a suicide pact? Anyway, most of the Constituition regrettably gets ignored now; as evidence, how much of current law could have passed in 1850? Exactly.
 

Txkstew

Veteran Member
I had to do my own Red Flag on my Dad. He was approching end stage Alzheimer's and while not violent, he started getting paranoid. I had to take all the big knives out of their house, without him knowing, and I took his pistol. He did ask about it, and I told him I had it in my safe. I said I would show it to him, if he wanted. He dropped the subject at that point
 

Publius

TB Fanatic
It's an attempt to end around Due-Process of Law! Government must show a compelling interest to strip a citizen of any of their rights, in other words a full blown court trial, it's just most don't know this and the government just walks over you, until they come across a citizen that knows better and stands up to them and do it without a lawyer as you don't need a lawyer to defend your rights in a court of law.
 

20Gauge

Has No Life - Lives on TB
This is actually possibly defensible for once, unusual for an Obama action.
Actually no! The SS has determined that since you are a Republican / Trump supporter, you have a mental illness and can no longer own a gun.

That is what the whole purpose of the action.

Get mental illness into the code and then apply and apply until all white men and women are denied their rights to guns. Then they would extend it to other non-acceptable groups. At some point they will then begin killing people.....

This is very similar to what happened in the 30s with Germany if I not too far off....
 
Last edited:

Old Gray Mare

Has No Life - Lives on TB
So, you think 60 IQ people longterm taking multiple psychoactive medications to keep their schizophrenia partially under control should own firearms, drive on the Interstate Highways, vote, serve on juries trying capital crimes or Constitutional cases, marry and produce children that they raise, etc. We're going to differ on that one. P.S. 60 years ago, in a clearly freer, healthier U.S., those sorts mostly didn't get to do those, typically being restrained in some way. Now, they're apparently considered heroic and a potential voting bloc for the Democrats. Interesting...
Minnesota I think what is trying to be expressed is that this is such a "Slippery Slope" with excessive possibilities for abuse of state power. We've seen the overreach and abuse of governmental powers so many times. The Utopia doesn't exist where government wouldn't abuse this.

I'm surprised you'd even suggest or imply it could work for anything but for those in power to disarm the people.
 

Freeholder

This too shall pass.
First, it is indefensible to take rights away from people who have not committed a crime, no matter how 'substandard' you or someone else may think they are.

Second, it's getting the camel's nose into the tent. Give them an inch here, and they'll take another inch, and another, and pretty soon they've got everything.

You have to be willing to defend EVERYONE'S rights, whether you think they deserve those rights or not, whether they use their rights in ways that you approve of or not. Otherwise, nobody really has any rights. Rights would exist only at the mercy of the mob in that case.

Kathleen
 

vector7

Veteran Member
The Left want to disarm demographically the most vulnerable in the nation as they look to South Africa for their Marxist Revolutionary inspiration.

Blue areas are artificially creating vacuums of Law and Order generating uncontrollable Anarchy.

Seniors and the weak are increasingly getting assaulted on streets and in homes by thugs daily as crime skyrockets.

NYC Mayor de Blasio looks to South Africa for inspiration for new racial justice commission

By Shant Shahrigian
New York Daily News |
Jun 21, 2020 | 2:35 PM

A new committee de Blasio is forming in the wake of protests over police brutality will be just like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, he said at a Bronx church on Sunday. That got to the whole impact that apartheid had on that society, and then talked about everything and acted on everything that needed to be different. Well that’s what we are going to do here in New York City., he said.


A new committee de Blasio is forming in the wake of protests over police brutality will be "just like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa," he said at a Bronx church on Sunday. "That got to the whole impact that apartheid had on that society, and then talked about everything and acted on everything that needed to be different. Well that’s what we are going to do here in New York City.," he said. (Getty Images)

A new city commission on racial justice will be “just like” South Africa’s famous Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Mayor de Blasio said Sunday.

“We are naming a city commission, a Racial Justice and Reconciliation — just like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa,” Hizzoner said. “That got to the whole impact that apartheid had on that society, and then talked about everything and acted on everything that needed to be different. Well, that’s what we are going to do here in New York City.”

The remarks were pretaped and shared at an online service held by Brooklyn-based Brown Memorial Baptist Church.

The mayor said the commission would focus on “the history of racism in this city” and “get at some larger truths about how people can actually get what they deserve like ... affordable housing” — one of the top priorities of his administration, which ends next year.

He and the city’s first lady Chirlane McCray announced the creation of the Racial Justice and Reconciliation Commission last week. She and Deputy Mayor Phil Thompson were already heading a task force charged with ensuring racial equity during the city’s coronavirus response.

South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was formed in 1994 in the wake of apartheid, and has since inspired similar undertakings around the world.

Contrary to McCray’s Friday assertion that the city’s Racial Justice and Reconciliation Commission marked the “first” municipal or state entity to undertake a “comprehensive truth and reconciliation process,” Mississippi’s governor and the Clinton administration launched a similar effort in 1997.

Niger Innis: BLM ‘not a damn thing to do with saving black lives,’ wants to ‘overthrow western civilization’
June 9, 2020 | Frieda Powers

The national spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality tore into the Black Lives Matter movement and exposed “some hard truths” about the group’s agenda.
Conservative activist Niger Innis warned Fox News host Laura Ingraham that the organization “would overthrow Western civilization,” reminding viewers in a fiery interview about the history and goals of the Black Lives Matter movement.

(Source: Fox News)
“They take their instructions, their guidance from the Marxist playbook. Look, I’m going to tell some hard truths that people aren’t going to want to hear” Innis began on “The Ingraham Angle” on Monday.

~SNIP~

Innis cited examples like that of 77-year-old David Dorn, a retired police captain in St. Louis, who was “murdered by savages committing acts of destruction.”

“It is so gross, and for all of these corporations… that give a dollar or millions of dollars to the BLM agenda, they are destroying black lives. You want to talk about anti-black supremacy, that’s the anti-black supremacy that’s taking place,” Innis contended.

“The irony is that it’s the illusion of black supremacy and the reality of a Marxist agenda that will bury all of us,” he concluded.
Yeah.. did you hear the rest of that little speech? That's just a "down payment" on what you're going to "give" ... they want your capital and land, too!
White peasant women live in the knowledge that if their husbands go out into the fields to work his land, he may never return.

The past week there were eleven robberies on farms where two farmers were killed, 18 were raped.

The president of South Africa Ramaphosa , the snake, wrote a document in 1993 announcing that the whites of South Africa would cook like frogs. Cook slowly so that whites don't realize they are being cooked .

Cyril Ramaphosa calls white farmers racists and with that statement he justifies his cooking plans.

Billionaire Ramaphosa only got rich thanks to whites and shaking hands with George Soros.

Soros/DNC/MSM are pushing their Color Revolution...American Apartheid (American White Privilege).
Fast forward after Soros/DNC/MSM finishes fundamentally transforming America into their Socialist ZUSA...
Return to South Africa (America) after Apartheid (White privilege is removed) - 4:30min
View: https://youtu.be/YM4BE14pAgo
A new thread emerged today with pics...take a peek into the future.
 

SmithJ

Veteran Member
There was discussion at the time about this affecting entire households where one was taking care of an elderly parent.
 

Orion Commander

Veteran Member
www.breitbart.com /politics/2020/10/22/joe-biden-proposals-include-reviving-obama-social-security-gun-ban/

Joe Biden Proposes Reviving Obama Social Security Gun Ban
AWR Hawkins
3-4 minutes


Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden’s gun control proposals could mean reviving the Obama gun ban that barred certain Social Security recipients from buying firearms.

The Social Security gun ban was an Obama-era policy which targeted benefit recipients who needed help managing their finances.
Just how many fail to manage their finances by hiring a income tax preparer? If you do you have just proven your financial incompetence and thus you need Uncle Sam to guide your 2nd Amendment rights.
 

glennb6

Contributing Member
This is actually possibly defensible for once, unusual for an Obama action.
in a political world were nearly everything is a lie or BS cranked up to eleven, don't you think that those pols that have, do, and will continue to want to disarm everyone but themselves, that they will start calling anyone who wants to buy/own a gun a "gun NUT"? Note my emphasis on the word NUT.

you are "crazy" to want a gun because it might kill someone... or some flavor of that statement would begin coming from the commies. every single MSM news story of a shooting will depict the shooter as mentally deficient. MSM will start demanding that something must be done about this clear danger. slowly and surely if the commies are in any form of control in govt, bills will be passed and guns will start to be outlawed.

"Shall not be infringed" has no ifs, ands, or buts.
 

The Mountain

Here since the beginning
_______________
People like the one I described would not routinely get to do those things in any country lacking a death wish. I thought the Constitution wasn't a suicide pact? Anyway, most of the Constituition regrettably gets ignored now; as evidence, how much of current law could have passed in 1850? Exactly.
But the law won't be applied to the people you described. It'll be applied to you, because they'll have some psychiatric "expert" in the bureaucracy determine that support for "conservative" principles constitutes a "condition" or somehow satisfies one of the other undefined terms, and then they'll hit you with a Red Flag order and come for your guns. And, if you resist at all, that will be proof to them that they were right.

Why do you think they have been conditioning people to accept their doctor asking about firearms? If that law goes into effect, expect it to become mandatory that you answer that question honestly, and if they decide to really go for the brass ring, a "yes" answer might be prima facie evidence of illness.
 

bobfall2005

Veteran Member
This is not the slippery slope.

It's a slip and slide with a garden hose tied to the top.

There are always fuds out there. And folks with an axe to grind.

Think this through:
You are not part of the power base. federal , state, or local. You're nobody.
The one right that keeps you alive, is gun rights. You would be in box car or a ditch, right now, without gun rights.
But, you want reduced gun rights for those you don't like. Who are in the power base. And leaders in the power base will use these folks to kill you.

Who is going to lose their gun rights, from your actions?
The folks in the power base.
Or
You.

Gun rights for ALL.
Until proven otherwise, everyone is fine.
 
Top