Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Kang Colby

(1,941 posts)
11. He should not be worried.
Fri Jun 3, 2016, 08:00 PM
Jun 2016

A VA determination only prohibits gun ownership/possession in cases where the individual has been assigned a fiduciary to manage their benefits. So, as long as your SIL hasn't been assigned a fiduciary to represent his interests before the VA, then VA will not report him as a prohibited person. http://www.benefits.va.gov/fiduciary/beneficiary.asp

This is essentially the same practice employed by the Social Security Administration.

That should put his mind at ease.

Having said that, gun rights supporters, lobbyists, and members of congress are working to strengthen protections for veterans' gun rights. The VA lacks regulatory authority to make the kind of determinations required by ATF regulations to prohibit gun ownership. Thus, a VA determination that a veteran is “incompetent” to manage finances is insufficient to conclude that the veteran is prohibited under the ATF’s standard that is codified in federal law. VA only has limited authority to make determinations of incompetency and only in the context of financial matters.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»My son-in-law told me yes...»Reply #11