PDA

View Full Version : Does anyone know the laws concerning PTSD and purchasing a firearm


AR-Ballistic
03-06-2010, 8:44 PM
I have a buddy who is 82nd and returned from Iraq. He is now out of the Army and has been diagnosed PTSD. He says its not really bothering him and he works for a living and leads a normal life. My question is being diagnosed with PTSD does that PROHIBIT him from ever purchasing a firearm? Thanks for any info.

JDay
03-06-2010, 8:52 PM
Not that I know of.

Cpl. Haas
03-06-2010, 8:53 PM
Has he been involuntarily held for a mental health evaluation?

Has he been declared a danger to himself or others by a judge or psychiatrist?

If the answer is no to both questions, I don't see why he would have an issue... no difference than being diagnosed with depression as far as I can tell.

JDay
03-06-2010, 9:04 PM
Did a little searching and found this.

http://ptsdcombat.blogspot.com/2007/10/are-ptsd-veterans-slated-to-lose-their.html

There is no such thing as the “Veterans Disarmament Act.” There is no pending legislation that would take firearms away from veterans. There is no pending legislation that would prevent a person with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), veteran or not, from purchasing a firearm or ammo.

But, there is a huge campaign of misinformation and scare tactics being forwarded by a small gun owners group who view themselves to be in competition with the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Let’s use some common sense instead of nonsense. If veterans were to lose the right to own firearms, you’d have a lot of unemployed cops. If those who have PTSD were to lose that right, there’d be even more unemployed cops and other first responders, as well. The arguments about a “Veterans Disarmament Act” are, quite simply, ridiculous and illogical.

The piece of legislation is question is H.R. 2640, the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. H.R. 2640 was carefully-crafted by the NRA and Members of Congress to protect the rights of gun owners, especially those who may have mental health issues such as PTSD.

As long as they can answer no to this question they're fine.

http://www.titleii.com/pdf/4473.pdf

Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes having been adjudicated incompetent to manage your own affairs) or have you ever been committed to a mental institution?

Shotgun Man
03-06-2010, 9:09 PM
Please try to encapsulate the gist of your post/thread in your title.

Your post sounds smarter and more people will look at it.

Sorry I have nothing more meaningful to contribute on what is no doubt a meaningful post.

AR-Ballistic
03-06-2010, 9:16 PM
No problem. Consider it done.

Please try to encapsulate the gist of your post/thread in your title.

Your post sounds smarter and more people will look at it.

Sorry I have nothing more meaningful to contribute on what is no doubt a meaningful post.

bodger
03-06-2010, 10:12 PM
Has he been involuntarily held for a mental health evaluation?

Has he been declared a danger to himself or others by a judge or psychiatrist?

If the answer is no to both questions, I don't see why he would have an issue... no difference than being diagnosed with depression as far as I can tell.

This is correct. I have been involved with the VA for treatment of PTSD since 1999. It has not affected my ability to purchase or possess firearms.

Glock-matic
03-06-2010, 10:30 PM
There was a case in California where a Vet with PTSD was denied a firearm when he answered yes to being treated for a mental disorder. There was a big stink and eventually they granted his registration. I wish I remember the exact case, but the brain gets fuzzy from all the "big guns"

radioactivelego
03-07-2010, 12:45 AM
5150 is a no-no. Institution visit is a no-no. Both can be written off by a Judge.

Meplat
03-07-2010, 12:56 AM
Don't ask don't tell.;) I have a friend who could have been diagnosed PTSD after Nam, if it had been invented yet. Half my uncles from WWII could have been also. They wake up at night screaming, their wives learn not to wake them suddenly or walk up behind and surprise them. Some extremely few may be a danger to them selfs or others, but it is not a reason to disarm whole generations of Vets. It's mainly a tool used by liberals to make people fear combat vets.


I have a buddy who is 82nd and returned from Iraq. He is now out of the Army and has been diagnosed PTSD. He says its not really bothering him and he works for a living and leads a normal life. My question is being diagnosed with PTSD does that PROHIBIT him from ever purchasing a firearm? Thanks for any info.

romeomikelima
03-07-2010, 12:59 AM
*****

Paragun
03-07-2010, 3:29 AM
Just my 2cents, no response to legality, just a story in support of Vets.

My step-dad (who served in Nam) had to be awakened by my mom because he could get violent with the startup. In the early days when mom was dating and living with him, he and I got into fights with him throwing me around whenever he was drunk. I was under 18 at that time and could not fight back because mom was too dependent on his income. That was over 20 years ago, he stopped drinking a long time ago and we are much better together now (he keeps calling me son).

Anyway, to make a long story short, he has a nice 9mm Taurus since before he met my mom. He has never threatened me or my mom in any way or even took it out in any threatening manner even when harassing me. Hell I only found out he had it in 2000. He has never been officially diagnosed PTSD though. At least he knows and respects firearms.

steelrain82
03-07-2010, 1:17 PM
You're buddy is ok to by a gun as long as he never goes to the nut house. There is a bill that has been stagnant but it's the vets disarmament act. It has to due with disarming vets who the va Deemed incompetent to handle their affairs. even financially. So if you've always been bad with money and the va says you can't handle it. They sent the list to the FBI. It's a real bill I looked it up and even called one of the senators that was fighting against it.

Scott Connors
03-07-2010, 4:17 PM
5150 is a no-no. Institution visit is a no-no. Both can be written off by a Judge.

I'm in the mental health field (RN at a county psychiatric health facility), so I'm pretty up to date on this. Being placed on a 72hr hold, or 5150, is a five year disqualification on buying or possessing firearms if it was for posing a danger to self or others, but not if the person were gravely disabled because of mental illness: this is California only, no fed impairment exists because no hearing was held. If a person is released at the end of the 72hrs, they can petition the court to have their firearm rights restored. However, if the hold is rolled over to a 14 day or 5250 there is a probably cause hearing to determine competency. If the hearing officer finds probably cause justifying further treatment due to danger to self, danger to others, or gravely disabled, this triggers a lifetime disqualification under federal law since it is considered an adjudication of incompetency. The only way to get rights restored is to go for a habeas corpus hearing to throw out the hearing officer's verdict; for HC the county has to provide a public defender, whereas for the 5250 hearing the patient is represented by a patient's rights advocate.
Regarding the VA: didn't the Clinton Administration VA turn over to the FBI the names of vets who had sought mental health counseling so that they could be entered on the NICS as disqualified? Or is this an urban myth?

B Strong
03-07-2010, 5:32 PM
I have a buddy who is 82nd and returned from Iraq. He is now out of the Army and has been diagnosed PTSD. He says its not really bothering him and he works for a living and leads a normal life. My question is being diagnosed with PTSD does that PROHIBIT him from ever purchasing a firearm? Thanks for any info.


PTSD is not a disqualifier.

domino
03-07-2010, 5:44 PM
I too have first hand experience (82nd) and yes he can still buy a firearm. I do all the time.

zeke2517
03-08-2010, 2:30 AM
He's GTG