Ed's Blog

"Some people know everything, but that's all they know."



The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has sent out letters to an unknown number of veterans with mental and physical disabilities informing them that they may be prohibited from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)


Filed under: Military, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

34 Responses

  1. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    does that mean i get a full 100percent on my ptsd?? i can always use the money for sure,, and I will just keep my guns anyhow, who will know unless i tell them, but if they say i am unstable because of my ptsd , then it appears I can retire..????

    By Steve Cardoza

  2. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    A homeless American vet with machine gun is in 1000 times more dangerous for the government than some taliban dude living in Afghanistan

    By costin rusu

  3. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    I’m a Vietnam Vet. Served with 5th Special Forces. Lots of PTSD & mental problems within my returnee ‘class’. Many of them gone too soon. Suicide, life terms in jail for shootings, drug deals gone bad, other gun violence. Wish to god we had papers, letters, laws, ANYTHING that would have taken the guns from us when we returned to the world.
    I’d rather have one or two harmless guys with gun-rights removed in error….than the carnage we have had. And you know what? All the rest of you still get to keep your guns; crazy or not.

    By Stephen S. Noetzel

  4. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    You sound like a reasonable person Ed. I invite you to take a good look at the 3-page Questionaire written by the VA. It is about the most sensitive government document I’ve ever seen. First, it is only sent out to vets who have already applied for, and received a VA Rating for some form of psychological (mental) disability. Think about that. We are talking here about a small number of vets with a serious mental condition that the vet, his family, and the VA all know about. The form also provides a viable option if the vet or his family have a private shrink who does NOT consider said vet to be incompetent. In these rare cases, if and when the feds actually arrive (afer all due process) and take the guns away from said vet….you know who is going to be most thankful? His own family, that’s who.

    By Stephen S. Noetzel

  5. EWRoss says:

    Steve, my concer isn’t those vets with mental problems, I agree with you on them, But the VA letter indicates that a vet with physical disability can end up on the NICS list. That’s my principal concern. Why sould a mentally stable double amputee be deprived of a firearmm to defend himself and his familly?

    Thanks for your comments.


  6. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    If it actually says that…if the form actually says that the government can remove firearms from a vet who has a physical disability, and is not mentally incompetent, then I believe it to be in error. In that case Ed, I totally agree with YOU. I know plenty of vets with missing limbs who deserve every chance to safely and sanely use firearms. That should not be taken from them.

    But….I doubt that this is what the VA is actually trying to do.
    By Stephen S. Noetzel

    • EWRoss says:

      Steve please read the letter and give me your interpretation.

      • Reposted from Linked In says:


        I have re-read, for the 3rd time, the entire VA letter.

        You ask for my interpretation. Very little interpretation is required. It is what it is.
        The second paragraph of the subject letter is a good recap of what the 3-page document includes, namely:
        > Evidence VA has received (not heresay)
        > What VA is required by law to do with such info/evidence (i.e Brady Act).
        > Impact on subject Veteran (i.e. possible turning over control of VA $$$ benefits and personal firearms to a competent person of your choice), and finally,
        > Scenario of how this plays out and how you can lodge a protest.

        In a careful reading of the next 7 steps, I see not a single reference to any other disability, save that of mental incompetency, with respect to this procedure. Ed it simply does not cover your example of a mentally stable duuble amputee. They are not coming after his guns. They are merely protecting him, and you, and me, from the whacko vet who is a big danger to himself and all of us.

        If you can show me otherwise, I sure would appreciate it.
        By Stephen S. Noetzel

  7. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    The VA has been tremendously good to me… And a big thanks to all American taxpayers for what you do for us!!

    By Marc Chamot

  8. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Thank you for this great post. I sent out a Tweet!

    By Brenda Lenard

  9. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    I will try to tune into your radio program tonight.

    By Brenda Lenard

  10. EWRoss says:

    Thank you very much.

    I spent 20 years in the Army, from which I medically retired, and 23 years in DoD as a civilian. I’ve written and read a lot of government letters. What bothers me about this letter is the sentence, “This evidence indicates that you are not able to handle your benefits because of a physical or mental condition.” That indicates to me that the VA can put a veteran on the NICS list for a physical disbility alone.

    Thanks much,


  11. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Ed I don’t know where you are getting your information regarding this letter from the VA, but I have to tell you that your source and you are absolutely wrong. The VA is sending the letters, and my source is the VA, because I have been sent one of the letters from the VA. You are not doing any of the veterans getting these letters any favors by spreading misinformation.

    By Harris Crowley

  12. Reposted from Linked In says:

    I have to apologize to Ed. I had been directed by a faulty link to a post that wasn’t Ed’s and it was that post I was responding to.

    By Harris Crowley

  13. Reposted from Linked In says:

    This is a red herring. Probably by a agent provaceteur. We look like idiots generalizing the specific issue raised here (a letter evidently sent to a veteran declared “psychologicaly incompetent”) to the whole population of veterans.

    This letter is clearly ONLY aimed at someone who is being declared mentally unfit (insane).

    It is a CYA sort of exercise, designed to be sure that the veteran understands the ramifications of accepting “crazy money,” and to ensure that the VA is not accused of allowing deranged vets to go on armed rampages.

    Would y’all rather that the insane vet be allowed access to firearms?

    This makes us conservatives look like idiots.

    By Kent Clizbe

  14. Reposted from Linked In says:

    The veteran may have a gun to defend the right for congress to prohibit the veteran from having a gun to defend himself and his family.


    By William Galvan

  15. Reposted from Linked In says:

    I love the VA and they have helped me a lot but I’m with Steve on this one, if they put limitations like these in place you should have 100% will full benefits.

    People who go on a murderous rampage will do anything to get a gun. I heard a statistic about 3 weeks ago that only 40% of all guns sold in the U.S are actually register or the gun owner went through a NICS check before purchasing that particular weapon. It is obvious, to me at least, that strict gun control policies probably will not work out well for the law-abiding Veteran or citizen. I understand those who have a serious problem, but if someone is going to do something, they will. There is only so much you can do to stop someone and by that time the person is even more pissed that the situation gets worst. And the severity of PTSD is hard to calculate unless the person is getting treated constantly.

    This is a link that my wife sent me, I think what this person is saying is the absolute truth.

    By Travis Laufenberg

  16. Reposted from Linked In says:

    This has been shown to be inaccurate. These letters have been sent out by the VA for decades.

    By Trenton Hansen

  17. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Yet these same conditions are not applied to non-military citizens who purchase firearms…

    By Candace Dumont

  18. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Ed, Thanks for your military service.

    By Wayne Neltner

  19. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Did anyone else see that commercial with Joe Biden with his gun control nonsense propaganda?

    He says in a very arrogant tone, “get a shotgun”….and then goes on to say that no one needs an assault rifle to protect their home, etc.. etc . etc..no one needs high capacity magazines…

    This guy is a TOOL.

    Does this nitwit actually think that if 2 or 3 bad guys show up at his house that he is going to be able to defend himself with a shotgun?? And, remember, under his proposed rule, he would only have the maximum the gun could hold when manufactured. That’s 8 shots maximum in a shotgun. This old fool thinks his 8 shots will hold back 2 or 3 intruders with AR-15’s, right?? Yeah…OK Joe.. Have another drink you old drunken fool.

    Obama is exactly what our forefathers had in mind when they drafted the 2nd Amendment. Obama is what they were scared of, and what they predicted. Obama IS THE REASON we need the 2nd Amendment.

    By Steve LaCroix

  20. Reposted from Linked In says:

    @ Ed,

    You posted a letter from Red Flag News, not exactly a top tier information outlet. I place them on the same level as “InfoWars” and anything printed by Jerome Corsi. It’s mostly sensationalism, unfortunately which has gone viral.

    Tell me, who has back checked this information? How many Vets have actually received this letter?

    It seems to me that the issue is of one Veteran, who has known mental issues and is irresponsible with his finances. The letter also goes on to say that the Vet must volunteer for treatment. Since the VA is not a court, they cannot legally deny the Vet his RKBA. Given that the root cause for the recent spate of mass murders is by people with mental issues, don’t you think it is better for all if the Vet in question seeks treatment/assistance with his condition?

    The letter, in and of itself, is nothing more than CYA paperwork from the VA.
    BTW- your title is misleading.

    By James Westover

  21. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Nice piece Ed!

    By John Laszakovits

  22. Reposted from Linked In says:


    The VA has the ability to “diagnose” incompetence, but they don’t have the power to deny a person’s 2A rights. That would still take a court order.

    @ Stephen – Leave us right wing conspiracy whacko’s alone. The left wing liberal lunatics had 8 years under Jr Bush, now we demand our turn. 😉

    By James Westover

  23. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Once again our President and Congress have failed us. Just another reason for troops to not come forward and seek help because they may be stripped of a right they have actualy earned.

    By Dominick Schoonmaker

  24. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Gosh these 2 threads should really be merged into one!
    From the other one (cited above) I answer Mr. Westover by quoting a very knowledgable female vet, Ms. Karen Jarman •

    Karen writes that IF…Your local VA shrinks feel you are incompetent to handle your own financial AND personal affairs (this gets you the letter)….

    AND…The Regional VA Review Board has you tested and confirmed as incompetent to handle your own financial AND personal affairs….

    AND…You don’t protest OR you do protest and the board reconfirms in spite of your evidence (or perhaps because of it);

    THEN…The board issues a final ruling that you are incompetent.

    THEN sections of the Brady Bill and a couple of others will be invoked to remove your weapons by local law enforcement or Federal Law Enforcement (I assume FBI) for the protection of yourself and others.

    IMHO, this would probably also mean you will be ordered into an assisted living facility, nursing home or mental institution for the good of yourself and others.

    In otherwords, just being a Veteran doesn’t take away your guns.

    End of Karen Quote.
    My conclusion: It probably DOES take a court order (probably initiated by your own family) to have you places into a care facility, but that is EXACTLY why a family would request such an order. To protect themselves and to protect a dangerous vet from himself as well.

    Good job Ms. Jarmin!

    By Stephen S. Noetzel

  25. Reposted from Linked In says:

    In the past it has always been the veterans who have firt stood up to defend their neighbors against predatory threats, who now will defend them?

    This action, like so many others which have occurred both publically and quietly during the last few years, demonstrates the distrust shown to those who volunteer to defend this nation and serve its government. Could it be that the government no longer trusts those who volunteer to place themselves in harms way to carry out the will of the President and Congress?

    If the figure of 25 million veterans is correct, then we are only talking about less than an eigth of the total population of the nation, and according to DHS material ‘leaked’ to the public and briefed to LES, they are amoung the most dangerous people in the nation. According to that logic, is it any surprise that all measures possible will be taken to nuetralize them?

    This is a failure of the average citizen to be engaged in the dealings (and machinations) of the government which they have elected. As a group we all elected these individuals, we have allowed special interests and money from dubious sources to control the processes of our government, we have allowed certain politicians to organize their own private groups to attack potential opponents and discredit any opposition, we have forgotten the lessons of the past and expect generations unborne to clean up the mess of corruption and perfidy we have allowed to flourish.

    As Mr Lincoln said in his first speech as president, ” This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.” Perhaps we should remind all veterans and those who are close to them of this right, for those numbers are much larger than an eigth of the population.

    Just a thought.

    By David A Winkler

  26. Reposted from Linked In says:

    No esay solution and a thought provoking piece. I agree there is no one size fits all approach, but like many other things in life..you have to start somewhere. As a data point (not saying it is right or wrong) the VA’s policy looks consistant with many state policies.

    By Kevin McGraw

  27. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Good enough to fight for me…but not good enough to protect himself and family? Utter nonsense. I think the Federal Government should give a specially engraved firearm to each and every veteran upon leaving the service. To honor his contribution and commitment to this great nation. It should be done post haste and at taxpayers expense. Any politician that disagrees should be removed from office at the next election.Any citizen that disagrees should be given the option of joining the service or being deported.

    By Stephen Scott Wright

  28. Reposted from Linked In says:

    While it may be a small detail, what some are getting wrong is that the VA is required by law to submit names to the FBI. The VA is not putting anyone on a “list” – that’s the call of the FBI wether or not to do so. The VA is simply following the law. Don’t like the law? Write your congressman and work to get it changed.

    By Don Rainwater

  29. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Mr. Rainwater, You are absolutely correct. Also eveeryone needs to keep in mind that each individual case is unique. As far as my finding by the VA, I have no intention of challenging it. I along with my family decided over three years ago that it was not safe for me to possess a firearm and I gave them all to my son in law. Having agreed that I should not possess a firearm does not in anyway imply that I should be placed in a nursing home or mental institution.

    By Harris Crowley

  30. Reposted from Linked In says:

    We do need to start somewhere and we need to be able to have honest conversations about it. Yes, I can see why on the face of it the VA telling vets they can’t have guns sounds cruel and somehow unpatriotic. However, the number of suicides of retired and active military are also unacceptable and having a gun close at hand does not help in cutting down suicides. I also realize that a waiting period doesn’t always work. My brother purchased a gun…. waited the week…. picked it up and killed himself the next morning.

    By Karen Smith

  31. Reposted from Linked In says:

    Glad you guys agree, because it looks like we are going to need all the Patriots we can get if we are going to keep our nation free. The current situation reminds me of a quote;

    “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

    By Stephen Scott Wright

  32. Anonymous says:

    I am a disabled veteran and part of my disability is based on mental disorder. Part of that is recurrent acute depression.

    I’d like to make two points.

    First: If a Veteran has been determine to be incapable of handling his own person and financial affairs and that determination has been made by a regular process that pays attention to his rights and offers a method of appeal, then it’s reasonable to restrict his access to firearms.

    Second: Last night I sat in my living room and wondered whether or not I could pull the trigger of my Grandmother’s single-shot .22 rifle with the muzzle in my mouth. That’s why I never keep ammunition in the house. I keep the rifle only because I think that someday living may hurt too much and it may be worth buying ammunition. If the VA took my gun I’d be a lot safer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

EWRoss on Twiter

RSS EWRoss.com RSS

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
%d bloggers like this: