Iraq Vet Stripped of Right to Bear Arms.

[J.]

I don't like to comment on things like this because I get so damned mad but I just thought I would post it.
FROM the news..
The V.A. declared Wayne Irelan incompetent and now his right to own a gun is gone.

"It's wrong. Laws need to be changed. They need to look at individuals and not stereotype them as some sort of mad man," Sgt. Irelan said.

Irelan has post traumatic stress disorder from the Iraq war, but his wife says he has never been violent. Lana Irelan told 5NEWS his diagnosis is not a legitimate reason for his gun rights to be taken away.

"I was there when they gave him his purple heart for fighting for that right to bear arms, and they are stripping it away," Lana said, her eyes tearing up.

The couple didn't know Wayne's gun rights had been terminated until they went to get a gun out of pawn. Days later Wayne got a letter from the Arkansas State Police saying his concealed carry permit had been revoked. The ATF has told the Irelans that they could go to jail if a firearm is found in their home.


http://www.kfsm.com/news/kfsm-news-...ed-of-second-amendment-rights,0,1708919.story

 

[Sky]

Sad all the way around

 

[Cap'n Jack Burntbeard]

What ever happened to due process?

 

[philpost]

While on the face of it, this seems criminally unfair, after reading the comments by vets in the accompanying story there may be another side. Evidently, this gentleman is recieving a stipend, in return for which he is being declared incompetant. One vet, evidently in a similar situation, felt this person wanted the money, and is now caught in the repercussions for accepting it.

 

[Barbara]

One small positive in this is that the news outlet seems to recognize his rights. That doesn't happen all the time.

 

[The Sarge]

I'm sorry ....but if a person declares they do not have the mental capacity to manage their own finances....you think they still posses the ability to determine right from wrong and can carry a gun? I don't think so!

 

[LRS_Ranger]

Having PTSD is pretty cool.. you get a medical discharge, you get paid for the rest of your life, you pretty much retire young. Even better yet, you can't prove that someone DOESN"T have it. So if you cry and act the part, they have to give it to you. Really similar to back and head injuries in that regard. The bummer of the fact is that it DOES come with consequences. I'm not trying to minimize the individuals who really DO have the condition. My deepest sympathies to those people. I'm just saying that I have a sneaky suspicion that a lot of the cases that wind up on paid disability are not really legitimate, at least not to the extent that the individual claims. Remember, the more screwed up you are, the bigger disability payment you receive. Plus you get out pretty fast too. Beats waiting for your ETS date.

I had a friend that did a similar thing with TBI. After a deployment, he researched all the symptoms and then started going to the doctor claiming to have them. Last I heard he's on his way out with full disability for the rest of his life. I didn't really stay in contact with him after that.. I can't really respect something like that. Maybe that guy is getting screwed for the screwing he did to the taxpayers. Food for thought.

 

[rfurtkamp]

but if a person declares they do not have the mental capacity to manage their own finances....you think they still posses the ability to determine right from wrong and can carry a gun? I don't think so!

Quite possibly, yes.

I get frequent kidney stones and have a variety of unpleasant freak genetic problems that caught up to me in my mid 30s. As such, I'm in pain a great deal of the time.

On bad days, I certainly don't have the desire, if not the actual capacity to handle much more than immediate threats or concerns - I'm not going to be balancing my checkbook.

I do retain basic understanding of right and wrong and consequences - fiscally incompetent doesn't mean drooling retard incompetent.

Perhaps this man is the same way.

And "shall not be infringed" applies to veterans and other people in this man's shoes as well as anywhere else.

 

[Morph]

rfurtkamp, thanks for adding to that.

If someone can't balance their checkbook then why trust them with a gun???

Non sequitor. It just doesn't follow.

 

[tank mechanic]

I am not surprised by this at all.

I know some soldiers who do not seek treatment for this very reason. This whole situation stinks and it is no way to treat those that have sacrificed so much for this country.

 

[armoredman]

This is the kind of thing that made me warn people about taking Wellbutrin and other psych meds for anti-smoking, as they now have on thier medical record they were prescribed psych meds. It's a shame we have to think this way, but we do, apparently.

 

[CornCod]

I am not suprised to read this. Arkansas has VERY authoritarian state officials. They tend to be officious and arbitrary.

 

[JohnBT]

A year ago the Irelan's began receiving a small stipend from Veterans Affairs because Lana had to take over the family's finances.

"How many husbands do you know in America that pay the bills? There's not very many," Lana Irelan told 5NEWS.

___________________________________________________

How many what? Say what? It appears from her statement that her husband had been paying the bills, until he couldn't.

I know lots of husbands who pay the bills. Jeez. I hope they misquoted her.

 

[7.62 Nato]

Having PTSD is pretty cool.. you get a medical discharge, you get paid for the rest of your life, you pretty much retire young. Even better yet, you can't prove that someone DOESN"T have it. So if you cry and act the part, they have to give it to you. Really similar to back and head injuries in that regard. The bummer of the fact is that it DOES come with consequences.

That is just so wrong in so many ways. There are people that abuse the system, and there are people that get on a pulpet spewing trash. I hope you never have to go through what I have.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Another reason not to volunteer for military service for a government/bureaucracy that does not appreciate you. Until the government "gets it right", there should be a moratorium on enlistments.

 

[VinnAY]

PTSD isn't a mentally stable diagnosis...that said I support the decision. Strip away the sensationalization words of "Iraq vet stripped..." and all you're talking about is an individual diagnosed as mentally ill and for that you should not be able to own a firearm. I support alot of firearms controls like this, not everyone is able to handle a firearm responsibly and once you're determined as such, it's a prudent decision.

 

[Barbara]

I should no longer be surprised by quislings and yet I still am.

 

[PT1911]

It happens a lot... claim disability based on PTSD and you get more money but are now unable to legally purchase and own a gun.

Furthermore, if someone legitimately has PTSD, a gun probably isnt a good thing for them to be carrying around as their "bouts" of the condition could lead to innocent people being injured or killed.. it is no different (at those times) than someone suffering from schizophrenia. All logic flies out of the window and judgment is very diminished as a result as something as simple as a truck backfiring going down the road or an ambulance siren.

If he does not suffer from PTSD, then he shouldnt have claimed such!

I greatly appreciate everything that Vets have done and continue to do to protect me, my family, and my rights, but, with that said, war has terrible affects on some people. As a result, some of those people cannot RESPONSIBLY carry or own a gun. I realize that there are varying degrees of PTSD. Everything from night terrors to full on hallucinations. My father actually suffers from PTSD, more of the night terror variety. IMO, IF someone suffers from PTSD to the degree of needing constant medical support and a lifetime of disability, then they are not someone I want near me with a gun... If someone can carry a gun, be around shooting guns at the range, and handle the stresses of daily life without having or nearly having a mental breakdown, they do not need the diagnosis or deserve the disabled status.

 

[LRS_Ranger]

7.62 Nato "That is just so wrong in so many ways. There are people that abuse the system, and there are people that get on a pulpet spewing trash. I hope you never have to go through what I have."

Which is why I said that those who legitimately suffer from PTSD, you have my gratitude and deepest condolances. I'm not minimizing your sacrifices, rather those who use and abuse the system do. Just because someone says that they saw something doesn't mean that they did. I seem to remember a couple articles in the Army Times/Stars and Stripes that was "exposing" some guy with ptsd that had never seen combat.

All I was trying to say by that is that some people make things out to be worse than they are, which allows them to get all kinds of benefits. Maybe he is one, I dont' know.

We are both right, just in different ways. I wouldn't say anything if I didn't know what I was talking about.

 

[Demitrios]

LRS Ranger says:

Having PTSD is pretty cool.. you get a medical discharge, you get paid for the rest of your life, you pretty much retire young.

Try telling my father, a field medic in the Army from '67 to '69, just how cool it is to have PTSD. Better yet, tell my mother how fun it is to sleep next to a man who has night terrors just about every night. Yeah, PTSD is just the coolest thing ever. For the record, the individuals who I know who do indeed own firearms are the farthest thing from representing an elevated threat due to their condition. If that's the case then anyone could argue that every gun owner who carries is just looking for trouble. . . oh wait a second. . . where have I heard those arguments before?

 

[Bubba613]

There is so much missing from the article it is impossible to draw a fair conclusion. What does it mean "he pays the bills"? He brings home money or he physcially writes the checks? Dunno.
What was the basis of the determination? Dunno. What is VA's position on this? Dunno.
So many times people post stories about the ATF or other gov't agency that sound egregious. Sometimes they are. But more often there is a lot more than is being reported. I recall the Cav Arms case for example.

 

[Rmeju]

Having been to Iraq and back, as well as being a strong supporter of gun rights, I have to say that when a man is determined to be mentally unstable, he shouldn't have guns.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be a system, subject to review/appeal/second (or third) opinion, and also not to say that the system shouldn't allow for a healed soldier to reclaim his rights. Nor is it to say that it isn't the government's job to get a soldier the treatment he needs for what they put him through.

But rightly or wrongly, welcomed back or forgotten, appreciated by the unknowing masses they served or not, an unstable soldier shouldn't own or carry a gun. Period. It doesn't matter if he was a decorated green beret hero or the mailroom clerk. It doesn't matter if he "deserves" to have his rights denied or not. Unstable is unstable, even if it isn't fair.

If it was my wife/mom/sister in the mall with a rampaging maniac - veteran or not - I'd be mad as hell if he'd been deemed a danger and wasn't stopped.

I don't favor the whimsey of a single doctor controlling the fate of my rights (especially given the anti-gun leanings of some doctors), but if there's a red flag, it needs to be looked into.

RmeJu

 

[PT1911]

Try telling my father, a field medic in the Army from '67 to '69, just how cool it is to have PTSD.

I dont think anyone underestimates how devastating this condition can be. The problem is, all of the vets who realized they could get more money each month by complaining to their VA doc that they were having (insert PTSD symptom here) and walk away with a diagnosis that gets them that extra check for disability... In doing so, they are willingly having themselves declared mentally defective and they lose their right to own/carry a gun.

I have personally seen A VET with PTSD swerve across 3 lanes of traffic to jump into a ditch as a result of hearing a vehicle near them backfire. Some cannot leave the house as a result of delusions of continued warfare and others because of their vivid hallucinations and/or complete loss of motor skills...

Should a person with narcolepsy or epilepsy drive? NO
Should someone who is unable to control their actions at times (mentally defective) be able to carry/own a gun? NO

Would we be having this conversation of the person was Schizophrenic, Bi-polar, etc....? NO

The fact is PTSD is a mental disorder that can severely diminish someone's ability to judge a situation... it is not inconceivable or improbable for someone with PTSD to draw and shoot someone in a panic for nothing more than dropping a book causing a sound that is someone similar to a gunshot.

 

[PT1911]

Having been to Iraq and back, as well as being a strong supporter of gun rights, I have to say that when a man is determined to be mentally unstable, he shouldn't have guns.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be a system, subject to review/appeal/second (or third) opinion, and also not to say that the system shouldn't allow for a healed soldier to reclaim his rights. Nor is it to say that it isn't the government's job to get a soldier the treatment he needs for what they put him through.

But rightly or wrongly, welcomed back or forgotten, appreciated by the unknowing masses they served or not, an unstable soldier shouldn't own or carry a gun. Period. It doesn't matter if he was a decorated green beret hero or the mailroom clerk. It doesn't matter if he "deserves" to have his rights denied or not. Unstable is unstable, even if it isn't fair.

If it was my wife/mom/sister in the mall with a rampaging maniac - veteran or not - I'd be mad as hell if he'd been deemed a danger and wasn't stopped.

I don't favor the whimsey of a single doctor controlling the fate of my rights (especially given the anti-gun leanings of some doctors), but if there's a red flag, it needs to be looked into.

RmeJu

Well stated.

 

[Shadow 7D]

having served with a few mentally unstable soldiers, let me assure you that if the Army won't give them a gun (and I had the misfortune of have to remove a few from soldiers experiencing 'difficulties') I don't think I want them having one.

I disagree with stripping rights without due process, but rest assure that getting PTSD 100% VA disability takes a while and they send you this pink sheet that explains your ability to appeal if you disagree. so.... it may be an unintended consequence, but I don't think I will join the lynch mob.

Lets change it, How Bout a Man Hating Rape victim that wakes up in cold sweats Diagnosed with PTSD and on disability, does it change anything?