PDA

View Full Version : No Gun Magazines at VA Hospitals?


Wrangler John
07-18-2011, 12:07 PM
I just read the following letter in the September 2011 issue of Guns Magazine Crossfire section:

VA Donations
I read with interest the letter from
Dale Cheuvront regarding donations of
magazines and books to VA hospitals, so
I thought Iíd donate my old magazines.
I took five large boxes of magazines
to the local VA, and was promptly told
they would throw away all the gun
magazines. VA regulations forbid that
type of literature in VA facilities. I guess
after the military has trained personnel,
they have gone to battle and come back,
they can no longer be trusted to read
about firearms.
So if you are going to donate
magazines, make sure they are Good
Housekeeping, New Yorker, or National
Geographic (with the naughty pictures
removed). Donít want to upset the
management.
Thor Ronlake
via e-mail

Is this a VA wide policy, or just the censorship of a few individuals? Is it something we should be concerned about?

Ford8N
07-18-2011, 12:16 PM
Wow!

Wernher von Browning
07-18-2011, 1:02 PM
Wrangler John, you Neanderthal! Don't you realize that it's the mission of the US military to win hearts and minds, not blow them to kingdom come? They build schools and hospitals (for the uneducable / unhealable). Gun magazines might give them the wrong idea about their mission. Yes, "Good Housekeeping" by all means...

nick
07-18-2011, 1:28 PM
Wrangler John, you Neanderthal! Don't you realize that it's the mission of the US military to win hearts and minds, not blow them to kingdom come? They build schools and hospitals (for the uneducable / unhealable). Gun magazines might give them the wrong idea about their mission. Yes, "Good Housekeeping" by all means...

Could've fooled me. I always thought that if we have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

johnny_22
07-18-2011, 1:35 PM
I leave gun magazines in my doctor's offices, when I am there for a checkup. They are never there when I get back months later.

I know at Doc-in-the-Box, the magazines are popular with the young patients.

If I actually asked, I might get the same answer as the letter writer got. But, I just casually put them down while I am waiting.

llamatrnr
07-18-2011, 1:37 PM
...winning hearts and minds - 2 to the heart and 1 to the mind . . .;)

tacticalcity
07-18-2011, 1:48 PM
NIqvxOEaPLk

vantec08
07-18-2011, 3:26 PM
Evidently there is no end to PC stupidity.

Decoligny
07-18-2011, 4:18 PM
Just go to the waiting rooms where the magazines are.

Leave the magazines in with the rest of them.

Sure, they will eventually find them and throw them away, after 50 or 60 people have had a chance to look them over.

lhecker51
07-18-2011, 4:36 PM
Wrangler John, you Neanderthal! Don't you realize that it's the mission of the US military to win hearts and minds, not blow them to kingdom come? They build schools and hospitals (for the uneducable / unhealable). Gun magazines might give them the wrong idea about their mission. Yes, "Good Housekeeping" by all means...

As a retired combat vet, I have seen the progressive social experiments over the years get worse and worse. Not only the policies on military bases, but in combat as well. If you thought Vietnam was bad regarding how politicians controlled the action, you should see it now in Afghanistan. Those of you that are Afghan vets know what I am talking about. The rules of engagement are a joke. I call it the "Catch & Release" policy. We are warned not to violate the policy as we could be charged with MURDER.

So am I surprised the the panty-waists at the VA don't allow Gun mags? Nope.

We do not have soldiers anymore. They are political fodder placed at the altar of political correctness. We do not have hero's anymore, only murderers that have not yet been convicted.

Sorry for the word barf all over the page, but this issue is another reminder to me that our warriors and the mission is not what is important anymore.

Wernher von Browning
07-18-2011, 4:42 PM
Could've fooled me. I always thought that if we have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

Well, it seems to work that way for TSA.

Ford8N
07-18-2011, 5:27 PM
As a retired combat vet, I have seen the progressive social experiments over the years get worse and worse. Not only the policies on military bases, but in combat as well. If you thought Vietnam was bad regarding how politicians controlled the action, you should see it now in Afghanistan. Those of you that are Afghan vets know what I am talking about. The rules of engagement are a joke. I call it the "Catch & Release" policy. We are warned not to violate the policy as we could be charged with MURDER.

So am I surprised the the panty-waists at the VA don't allow Gun mags? Nope.

We do not have soldiers anymore. They are political fodder placed at the altar of political correctness. We do not have hero's anymore, only murderers that have not yet been convicted.

Sorry for the word barf all over the page, but this issue is another reminder to me that our warriors and the mission is not what is important anymore.

Yup

Example: Bin Ladin hiding and directing al-Qaida in Pakistan. The US government knew all along where he was but we are to much of a pansy(PC) government to go in and get him. American soldiers will continue to die for P.C.

Wrangler John
07-18-2011, 6:00 PM
Wrangler John, you Neanderthal! Don't you realize that it's the mission of the US military to win hearts and minds, not blow them to kingdom come? They build schools and hospitals (for the uneducable / unhealable). Gun magazines might give them the wrong idea about their mission. Yes, "Good Housekeeping" by all means...

Could've fooled me. I always thought that if we have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

Gentlemen, Please do not give me credit as a Neanderthal. Clearly I'm a troglodyte as evidenced by the guano adhering to my animal skin robe. Neanderthals had a much more developed culture, akin to yogurt, while I merely stink of mold, mildew and the odors they cause. I love your humor.

Anchors
07-18-2011, 6:44 PM
As a retired combat vet, I have seen the progressive social experiments over the years get worse and worse. Not only the policies on military bases, but in combat as well. If you thought Vietnam was bad regarding how politicians controlled the action, you should see it now in Afghanistan. Those of you that are Afghan vets know what I am talking about. The rules of engagement are a joke. I call it the "Catch & Release" policy. We are warned not to violate the policy as we could be charged with MURDER.

So am I surprised the the panty-waists at the VA don't allow Gun mags? Nope.

We do not have soldiers anymore. They are political fodder placed at the altar of political correctness. We do not have hero's anymore, only murderers that have not yet been convicted.

Sorry for the word barf all over the page, but this issue is another reminder to me that our warriors and the mission is not what is important anymore.

I have read here and heard from people that the ROE is pretty much even if you see a guy screaming to Allah with an AK, he has to be actually trying to shoot you before you can take him out.

Is there truth to that? Is it THAT strict?
Seems like it would endanger troops' lives...

Kid Stanislaus
07-18-2011, 7:54 PM
Example: Bin Ladin hiding and directing al-Qaida in Pakistan. The US government knew all along where he was but we are to much of a pansy(PC) government to go in and get him.

Excuse the live'n snot out of me here Ford but I was under the impression that the US military did EXACTLY that! Was I misinformed?:confused:

wheels
07-18-2011, 10:44 PM
Excuse the live'n snot out of me here Ford but I was under the impression that the US military did EXACTLY that! Was I misinformed?:confused:

Apparently the timeline has you confused - easy mistake.

Ford8N
07-19-2011, 4:55 AM
Excuse the live'n snot out of me here Ford but I was under the impression that the US military did EXACTLY that! Was I misinformed?:confused:

Bin Ladin was in the country of Pakistan. The US government knew that. Parts of the Pakistan government help and sheltered Bin Ladin. The US is afraid of Pakistan for some reason, I don't understand. We should have gave Pakistan 24 hours to turn him over or we would go into Pakistan like we did Afganistan. You can't fight a war successfully if your enemy has places to hide and are off limits to our military. A lot of our soldiers died because we couldn't go to the hive of al-Qaida....which is in Pakistan. Political Correct warfare costs lives.

green grunt
07-19-2011, 10:44 AM
Used to leave my old copies of SGN in the waiting room at the VA in Stockton...last time I left 10 copies and by the time I got out of my appt. (35mins)...they were gone ! and the Vets did not take them , an Old Marine told me the cleaning guy took them all...

what a bunch of cowflop.......freedom to read what ever you want.....NOT.

Kavey
07-20-2011, 1:47 AM
I just read the following letter in the September 2011 issue of Guns Magazine Crossfire section:

VA Donations
I read with interest the letter from
Dale Cheuvront regarding donations of
magazines and books to VA hospitals, so
I thought Iíd donate my old magazines.
I took five large boxes of magazines
to the local VA, and was promptly told
they would throw away all the gun
magazines. VA regulations forbid that
type of literature in VA facilities. I guess
after the military has trained personnel,
they have gone to battle and come back,
they can no longer be trusted to read
about firearms.
So if you are going to donate
magazines, make sure they are Good
Housekeeping, New Yorker, or National
Geographic (with the naughty pictures
removed). Donít want to upset the
management.
Thor Ronlake
via e-mail

Is this a VA wide policy, or just the censorship of a few individuals? Is it something we should be concerned about?


If we're not talking about pornography (I know the anti-gunners consider publications about guns to be pornographic) aren't we really talking about a first amendment issue?

How can a "government" agency favor, let's say, Popular Photography or Readers Digest over Guns & Ammo and Shooting Times? Sounds like an unconstitutional form of censorship to me.

Legal minds, please comment.

____________________________

I'm not a lawyer, but I have seen every episode of Judge Judy.

RomanDad
07-20-2011, 7:47 AM
If we're not talking about pornography (I know the anti-gunners consider publications about guns to be pornographic) aren't we really talking about a first amendment issue?

How can a "government" agency favor, let's say, Popular Photography or Readers Digest over Guns & Ammo and Shooting Times? Sounds like an unconstitutional form of censorship to me.

Legal minds, please comment.

____________________________

I'm not a lawyer, but I have seen every episode of Judge Judy.

No. I dont think so. They are a government agency, but they are a government agency that has a specific mission of providing medical care to a subset of the public- veterans. Whether there are magazines in their waiting rooms, and what types of magazines those are, is extraneous to that mission. And as such they would be able to make the determination that some magazines may be counterproductive to what they are trying to achieve.

Obviously, one of the services they provide is mental health and psychological counseling to patients with depression, PTSD, and thoughts of suicide. I don't think its an IRRATIONAL conclusion to make a housekeeping decision that those people don't need to be provided with magazines about firearms as they seek out their treatment, by the people treating them. They could also argue that some patients are less likely to seek out treatment, if their are certain publications in the waiting rooms. Their mission is treating patients. Not providing reading materials. If a VA patient wishes, he can stop at the corner newsstand and BUY any number of firearms magazines, or go to the public library and browse them to his hearts content. A VA hospital is neither a newsstand nor a library. If you want to read, you read what they put out, or you bring your own books with you.

Taking the scenario to its most extreme, if you donated a lifetime subscription to a White Supremacist newsletter, the VA would be free to reject that gift for the negative implications displaying it would have on its minority customers. Even though the government cant prevent the newsletter from being printed in the first place, they dont have to endorse it in their facilities.

Patrick-2
07-20-2011, 8:12 AM
PTSD. Gun magazines will frequently have "combat" related stories in them, even if just personal self defense related stuff. The VA is dealing with a lot of PTSD right now (a lot) and one of the therapies involves controlled re-application of battle-related imagery to gradually desensitize and re-accommodate the topic. Not to bring them back to battle, but to actually help them cope with civilian life. This is not designed to soften them up. It is to lessen the imagery so they can control the feelings that result from it. They are using specially designed video games in some instances that let them virually do everything from walk down a busy street (with a car backfiring) all the way through actual combat re-imagery. It requires exceptionally careful application of stimulus to avoid causing harm in the process.

So far it is working. I have a friend who works with these folks, and it is hard, slow and rewarding work.

I have not spoken to her about gun mags in particular, but we have talked about nightly news, magazine stories and Hollywood action films. All can be a "trigger" that causes a setback. You cannot really avoid all of it, especially in open society and TV. But within the confines of the VA offices where these folks might be looking for assistance, they might be able to create some distance from it, even for a few minutes.

Going through all the mags looking for those that would not cause a 'trigger' could take a long time. Faster option is to remove them.

PTSD is the unspoken side-effect of our current policies. It is not a typical "Wounded Warrier" type issue where you can see the damage. The suicide rate among infantry units has sky-rocketed. They are seriously trying to get a grip on it, and frankly a lot of it is experimental. Right now they have some roads that seem to work better than others. Thankfully troops are talking about it, now. The suicides really started waking people up.

So don't take this as a sign of political correctness run amok. It might just be a little thing to help a few folks during treatments.

socal2310
07-20-2011, 8:38 AM
I agree with Patrick's opinion on why gun magazines are likely restricted. Of course, it's a problem that we have created...

The biggest problem as far as PTSD in soldiers is concerned is one of cognitive dissonance. Telling people that it is wrong to kill (which is what the ROE do) and then putting them in a position where they will almost certainly have to kill is criminal in my opinion. They should at least make "On Killing" mandatory reading so that our young men in uniform at least realize that the moral ambiguity they are experiencing is perfectly normal.

Ryan

Ron-Solo
07-20-2011, 11:50 PM
Years ago my son did his Eagle Scout project establishing a library at our local Veterans Hospital. When he started collecting books and magazines, gun related magazines were prohibited because of the PSTD and suicide issues they frequently deal with, and this was prior to the current conflicts, but after Desert Storm.

In that context, it makes sense. They will allow family members to bring the magazines to an individual patient that isn't dealing with those issues.

They also don't allow hard cover books. Some of the patients are dealing with rage issues and throw them at staff. Paperbacks don't hurt as much.