Federal Government

When the Insane Manage The Asylum…


The office of Senator Mike Crapo sent out a press release today which defies reason. In short, his proposal will make it easier for people to get guns who are so mentally incompetent they need a third party to manage their Social Security affairs.

Here is the entirety of the release with the Senator’s headlines.

Senator Says Social Security Rule Threatens Second Amendment Rights of Beneficiaries

WASHINGTON – Idaho Senator Mike Crapo today voted to support a Resolution of Disapproval that will stop a rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) from stripping the Second Amendment rights of some Social Security beneficiaries.

“Today’s resolution of disapproval will stop the Social Security Administration from stigmatizing people with disabilities and stripping beneficiaries of their Second Amendment rights,” said Crapo, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “The Social Security Administration is not a court of law and it is unacceptable that it take any action against a beneficiary without due process. Congress has done the right thing to stop this overreach and repeal this rule.”

Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress may submit a joint resolution of disapproval to overturn a final rule issued by an Executive Branch agency. The resolution approved today will halt a rule submitted by SSA in December 2016. The rule requires SSA to report individuals who have been adjudicated as “mentally defective” to the National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS). Under the rule, individuals who have been appointed a representative payee may also be submitted to NICS. In some cases, the SSA may appoint, or a beneficiary may request, a representative payee to assist a beneficiary with managing their benefits. The wide-ranging rule will affect many Americans as more than eight million beneficiaries need help managing their benefits, according to SSA. Earlier this year, Senator Crapo introduced a bill to effectively overturn the rule and highlighted it in an op-ed this month. The Resolution passed today by the Senate will enact the changes Senator Crapo sought to address with his legislation.

The measure now goes to President Trump who is expected to sign the measure.

There are obvious issues regarding “private medical information” going to NICS, but an argument can certainly be made that public safety is compromised when guns are easily accessed by people of diminished mental capacity.

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. I wonder if a legal refresher course for all members of congress would be in order here.

    What part of adjudicated doesn’t Mike Crapo understand? Now I remember why I don’t vote for the incumbent and term limits should be the rule everywhere.

  2. Has the SSA weighed in on Crapo? Sounds mentally defective to me!

  3. mentally defective is the point. I agree also that persons representative should not be able to buy for that person. Someone needs a Gibbs slap to the back of the head

  4. “diminished mental capacity.”

    Lots of possibilities there.

    Should they all be treated the same?

    Due process and equal treatment say not.

  5. Concerned Neighbor
    Feb 16, 2017, 8:05 am

    Asking someone to help manage your finances has nothing to do mental incompetency. The younger generation is much more familiar and skilled on average than their retired parents so often help out.

    Outrage of this particular Obama gun grab stems from a retired vet in Sandpoint who granted power of attorney to one of his children. The federal government swooped in and stole all of his firearms. It had nothing to do with any kind of safety action, lack of competence, or mental deterioration.

    There are some mental health issues that do raise safety questions. That’s not what is at issue. We do need to provide more support for those specific cases that have a very significant potential for harm. Unfortunately, this wasn’t it.

  6. Hmmm… definitely two sides to this argument.

    As pointed out by David, “adjudicated as mentally defective,” on the surface, suggests that the person might be untrustworthy to own and operate a potentially-deadly weapon.

    But, as pointed out by Concerned Neighbor, the government has a reputation for using underhanded methods to accomplish its ends.

    (If I’m not mistaken, the only time the NICS comes into play is when somebody wants to buy a gun from a licensed dealer. I’m not sure how the feds would justify “swooping in” and taking the guns somebody already owns, regardless of who conducts that person’s financial affairs.)

  7. bikeboy,
    you could refresh the Ruby Ridge story when it comes to lessons of “swooping in” to take guns somebody already owns.
    That was ‘this person has a felony warrant, is armed, and the rest is history’.

    “Justifying” something is not a requirement of BATF, FBI, DEA, DHS, or most local police.

    Putting someone on the list is only one step. The next step is obviously, “do you currently own any firearms?”.

    Unless of course everyone thinks it is okay to prevent someone from buying more guns while allowing them to keep any they already have…

  8. Creeping Fascism
    Feb 17, 2017, 5:35 pm

    Ever notice how the Federal Government only takes away rights, never gives them?
    Fast forward a few years and only those with money or power will be deemed sufficiently trustworthy to own guns.
    Long ago, the US Military and private citizens owned the same weapons.
    Try and buy an M16 rifle today and big.gov puts you in a cage for years with 3 servings of slop a day.
    There are simply too many laws, too much government power, too much abuse of power.

  9. Republicans in Minnesota also sponsoring air head gun legislation. Glad you posted this. This means with mentally disabled OK to get guns, Congress will also be able to lock and load, in the Capitol I assume.

  10. Was there a documented problem of SS recipients using guns in an unlawful manner? Obama never cited any data to support this premise. What Obama did was what he always did. Lump people into groups and treat them the same. Obama did this on his way out of office. If individual rights are going to be limited in some fashion, it should be individually and not because you are in a class determined by government bureaucrats. If you have to hire someone to do your income taxes because they are too complicated are YOU somehow mentally deficient? Some of you may laugh at this, but the premise is the same. You are in a group of people that cannot do your own taxes. Therefore, YOU may be a danger because you lack the capacity to manage your taxes. I personally help an elderly person deal with Social Security issues. It is no easy task to deal with the Federal Government.

  11. It seems only the insane want to manage the asylium.

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address: