The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
10 votes

VA Writes Letters to US Veterans 2nd Amendment Rights Revoked Per 2013 NDAA

VA Writes Letters to US Veterans: 2nd Amendment Rights Revoked Per 2013 NDAA

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Then apply to police as well

Bogus on its face. The ability to claim PTSD is a huge step forward in treating vets, and now a huge liability. Do you think they'll apply this same logic to police? Nah...

They Don't Want A Bunch

of PO'ed vets out there that know what's REALLY going on armed and able to defend the civilians.


Will this effecf the drive a car

or a truck or operate heavy machinery. Those would seem like much more hazardous circumstances for everyone around them...A multi ton battering ram moving up to 100 + miles an hour...Yet this isn't even mentioned...The true intent here is very evident.

Just one last kick in the nuts, then a final deathblow

So they're assigning a presumption of incompetence...

...on veterans and placing burden of proof on them to prove their competence?

This is pretty horrible.

This is pretty horrible. Maybe if they go through mental tests before enlisting they can sue later if found mentally "defective". Could a class action lawsuit stop these ridiculous wars?

Good idea on stopping the ridiculous wars.

If the gov't is so concerned that exposure to combat will cause questionable physical or mental condition that the service men and women need to be disarmed, perhaps they should stop sending them to these bs wars in the first place.

BS wars and

BS laws, too.
So the letter cites: Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2) the basis for this nonsense.

I'd like to remind 'them' that Marbury vs. Madison establishes that ALL laws repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. The Constitution is VERY clear on the 2nd Amendment...SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED...NO exemptions are included...

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond

Atta girl ;)

"In writing the decision, John Marshall argued that acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution are not law and therefore are non-binding to the courts, and that the judiciary's first responsibility is always to uphold the Constitution."