As Twitchy reported earlier this week, gun control advocates were preparing to freak out yet again, this time over the GOP voting to, ahem, arm severely mentally ill veterans at risk of suicide. David Petraeus and a group called the Veterans Coalition for Common Sense pleaded with lawmakers to leave in place rules they claimed would protect these veterans from themselves.

The House thought otherwise, and by a vote of 240-175 on Friday approved the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act and sent it on to the Senate.


His tweet is from earlier in the week, but seeing as Rep. Keith Ellison‏ was recently elected deputy chair of the Democratic Party, his take on the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act is worth a look.

Damn, that’s cold … so all “mentally ill” veterans are either suicidal or mass shooters in waiting? Can we get a second opinion?

Oddly enough, Newsweek came through this week with an opinion piece by Charles Schmidt, national commander of the American Legion — an organization the country doesn’t hear from nearly enough, we’d say.

While supposed advocates for both veterans and the mentally ill are running around screaming that the sky is falling, Schmidt lays out the issue in the simplest terms possible:

Current Department of Veterans Affairs policy unfairly imposes upon the Second Amendment rights of veterans who are experiencing financial difficulty and require VA assistance in managing their money.

Under current VA rules, all such veterans are considered incompetent forcing officials to report them to the FBI to have their names listed on the National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) System.

All persons on the NICS list are ineligible to purchase firearms.

“The new legislation merely transfers the authority to strip a veteran of their Second Amendment rights from VA to the courts,” Schmidt clarifies.

It’s sad, really: one excuse the mayors and council members of sanctuary cities give for sheltering illegals is that, because they fear deportation, they’ll refuse to cooperate with police and (anecdotally) go hungry rather than collect food stamps. Yet what of the veteran who is fully trained in the safe use of firearms but feels he or she needs assistance managing his money? Better not risk it if the cost is the right to bear arms.

* * *

Related: