Rand Paul Unveils Bill to Protect Seniors, Vets from Obama Gun Grab

Sen. Rand Paul.  (Photo: Rand Paul's Twitter page)

Sen. Rand Paul. (Photo: Rand Paul’s Twitter page)

Last week, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul introduced a bill to protect seniors and veterans who are at risk of losing their Second Amendment rights because they need help and/or assistance with their finances.

Known as the “Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act,” the bill would ensure that one’s due process rights are upheld in the event that the government attempts to take away their right to keep and bear arms.

“The Obama administration is at it again, and this time they are unilaterally stripping gun rights from our nation’s veterans and seniors. The Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act will provide necessary protection for gun-owning Americans, and ultimately ensure that the Second Amendment is not infringed upon,” Sen. Paul said.

Under an Obama administration executive action, veterans and social security recipients who have who have a representative payee to handle their finances may have their personal information sent from the Veterans Administration and Social Security Administration to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) under the pretense that they are a prohibited person.

But that’s not necessarily the case.  Just because one does not manage one’s finances, does not mean that one is a mental defective, which is what the Obama administration is assuming with its sweeping executive action.


Paul’s bill would see that before their rights are denied, they have their day in court.

“Senator Paul’s ‘Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act’ will do much to block President Obama’s ability to strip the Second Amendment rights from law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens without due process,” aid the National Association of Gun Rights.

“Furthermore, it would restore rights for thousands of law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens who were stripped of their Second Amendment rights without getting their day in court,” continued the pro-gun organizations. “Once again this bill shows that Senator Paul is one of Washington’s leading advocates for gun owners and the Second Amendment.”

Here are the nuts and bolts of the legislation:


  • Prohibits the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to an individual that has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent or committed to a psychiatric hospital. Adjudication requires findings by a judicial officer or court and the individual receives notice to participate with counsel.
  • Within 90 days, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs must review and remove from NICS any veteran that has not been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. The Attorney General will certify that the removal of names has taken place.
  • Prevents the Social Security Administrator from reporting individuals to NICS unless individual has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. Attorney General will conduct a yearly review to certify reported names have necessary documentation.
  • Attorney General must certify a state’s report indicating a person had been adjudicated as mentally incompetent prior to inclusion to NICS.
  • All individuals considered to no longer be adjudicated as mentally incompetent will be notified and have their rights restored.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 20 comments… add one }
  • Outdoors Guy March 10, 2018, 9:57 am

    I’m trying to understand if GA is running out of newsy material or they have simply laid off all of their staff correspondents to save some bucks?? This article about Rand Paul “unveiling” a bill to protect Seniors and Vets from the Obama “Gun Grab” will celebrate its 2nd anniversary next month!! Hello? Earth to GA, come in please …..

    I didn’t follow the entire path of the bill in the spotlight but it is just a month short of 2 years later and I haven’t had as much as a paper target, perforated or new, not a water pistol or BB gun, or any other vaguely “gun related” item confiscated from my personal “armory”. I am all in favor of keeping a “Watchdog” eye on the bureaucrats but it’s a bit redundant to dredge up old news that has become history unless there is some reason to do so?? You have more than enough to fill your website as it is without going back in the archives for more of the same ol’ same ol’ stuff.

  • T. MacArthur January 30, 2017, 6:33 am

    I most often don’t sgree with Rand Paul. But this time I do. Needing a representative poayee (RP) does not mean one is mentally incompetent or dangerous. If SS disability is denied and one appeals, a Social Security administrative law judge can say someone needs one for any number of reasons which have nothing to do with actual mental competence. Someone, like my wife, might have a severe math disability (she isn’t on SS, but if she ever applied for SS disability, the “judge” at an appeal hearing might require her to have an RP). Sometimes it is even used as coercion. I know one person who has what you muight call “benign” PTSD, as well as heart problems. His PTSD is the survivor’s guilt type and though he’s “normal” pn all other respects, it results in him being unable to deal with folks on a social level. He doesn’t think (subconciously) that he deserves to be liked, so he (unknowingly) behaves in ways that make people not like him, even though he never does anything mean, nasty, aggressive, etc. He’s the kind who’ll give you the shirt off his back if you need it more than he does. Ask someone why they dislike him and they can’t really say why, just that they don’t want to be around him. It’s even cost him jobs – nobody wants him around, and most bosses will get rid of one person to make everyone else happy. At his appeal hearing, the “judge” decided to force him to get treatment for the PTSD, although it had been undiagnosed for about 20 years, and if not treated fairly soon after it first happen it becomes pretty much untreatable. So the “judge”, even while saying the heart trouble was the deciding factor, gave him the SS, but required that he have an RP who was a mental health professuonal. I told him to go see his doctor, who signed a certificate saying he was perfectly able to handle his finances, so that didn’t last. But it’s an example of how these admin law judges can saddle someone with an RP for whatever reason they want to, even when nothing regarding mental competency or even, in his case, ability to handle finances is even mentioned.

  • Roy M. May 6, 2016, 8:33 am

    Just like a typical Alinski motivated tyrannical bully, this administration picks on whomever they feel is the weakest to go after with intent to take away their rights. Got news for these chumps. My wife has taken care of my/our finances for years. I’m too busy gunsmithing, shooting, as is my constitutional God given right and taking care of my collection along with my other responsibilities. Except for the anti-gun minority here (legal and illegal) whom the media and our government always shows favor for, here in Arizona are the majority are good law abiding pro-gun citizens. I know very few who don’t carry concealed and strangely enough except for our OOB (Obama Open Border) problems crime seems to be down. Our schools are mass shootings waiting to happen God forbid. We have armed guards to protect banks but obviously our genius leaders don’t feel our children are as precious as our money. Those who just sit back and think someone else is going to fight this fight for them had better stop just sitting back and cleaning their guns, get off their asses and get involved anyway they can because this is going to take all of us to fight for our rights as this progressive poisoned atmosphere indoctrinates our children and grandchildren!

  • Rich April 27, 2016, 8:05 pm

    Gun rights are solid in the USA. Certain states are difficult if not impossible to get a CWP but rifles are allowed for home safety and pistols for firing range. The problem is small budget in some towns to police background checks. The country has a Meth/Drug epedemic. I like some of the ideas here but blaming everything on Washington is misleading. Sen R.Paul should focus on JOBS. Then we regular Americans will take care of the rest. May Christ be with you in your most troubling moments. Share the LOVE among Gods children. Sometimes we are given a LEAD Cross to carry rather than one made of wood. Seen enuf War.

  • Andrew N. April 24, 2016, 1:53 am

    About time someone did something about this. There are numerous reasons to have someone else listed on your account, “helping” with your finances. Some of them include keeping the IRS from stealing your hard earned money under the guise of “Inheritance Tax”. If your kids are on the account already, the IRS can’t touch it, as they don’t know who the money actually belongs to. There’s another solution for other circumstances where Seniors / Vets have a hard time budgeting…PAY them more! We give SSA money to people who’ve never put into the system and / or illegals who have ZERO right to any type of Social Security or Gov’t monies. They are ILLEGAL! The amount we give people in Soc Sec is embarrassing. Some of these people forego meals for days at a time and / or medications they can’t afford. I think it’s part of a Gov’t plan to kill off the “worthless” members of society, those who are “draining” the “entitlement programs” like Soc. Sec. Entitlement my ASS, I paid in to it for over 41 years and counting! Just because our wonderful Gov’t has turned it into another tax to be used at their discretion doesn’t mean it should be. The American people made a deal with the Gov’t to ensure income in the “golden years”, and the Gov’t isn’t honoring their part of the bargain. If they paid back Social Security everything they took from it, adjusted for inflation, the system would be solvent.

    • T. MacArthur January 30, 2017, 7:03 am

      Just a clarificattion. It can’t do a thing for you tax-wise. It isn’t about “having someone on your account”. A representative payee (RP) is the person the government sends your Social Security (or sometimes Veterans disability compensation) money to. If you have an RP, you can’t touch a penny unless the RP lets you have it. And the RP has to keep exact records, accounting for every cent and explaining where every penny went, like paying your rent or whatever, and he better have receipts for everything. And he can’t just hand you the money every month, either. He can’t, for instance, get away with giving too much of it directly to you. With an RP, you have absolutely no control at all over your own finances. Also, for Social Security this applies mostly to people getting SS disability, not SS retirement. They assign an RP if the disability that’s the reason for requesting SS disability is a mental problem which indicates that the person can’t safely handle his own money. Or if the person is turned down, appeals, and the administraative law judge at the hearing decides, for whatever reason, that he needs an RP. With SS retirement, about the only way to end up with an RP is if someone, like a relastive or some social service agency, asks SS to give you one and supplies evidence that you can’t take care of your own money. With the VA, if they decide you can’t safely handle your money yourself they’ll require an RP. But all that being said, there are a lot of reasons someone might not be able to handle his own finances thart have nothing to do with any other kind of competency. Having an RP does not mean someone is nuts, dangerous, delusional, or whatever.

  • jim April 22, 2016, 8:34 pm

    All Americans have to do is watch obama’s body language and see’s what he has & still is doing to this CHRISTIAN NATION UNDER THE ONE AND ONLY (TRUE GOD- JESUS CHRIST)!!!!!!! He wants to disarm us, so his brothers’ jidas or whatever they call one another want to do to all of us. GOT NEWS FOR ALL OF THOSE MUSLIMS MY JESUS IS IN CONTROL AND I AM SORRY FOR THEM AS THEY CONTINUE THEIR JOURNEY TOWARDS- AND I WILL PRAY FOR THEM AS MY HOLY JESUS TELLS ME.

  • law dawg April 22, 2016, 6:44 pm

    Stop the talk and walk the walk….wr have to get rid of the Clintons. Obamas, Bloombergs, and any progressives in power. The have to be voted out there positions of power. If it’s not done the 2nd amendment is doomed….

    • Rich April 27, 2016, 7:56 pm

      Critical thinking skills take time to acquire and there are courses in local schools to help you understand that an apple falls down from a tree but cannot fly up by itself. Check with Politicofacts.com to see our opinions are not accurate. May we see Christ in each other my dear brother.

  • Joe McHugh April 22, 2016, 4:08 pm

    I am a senior and a vet. I am planning on arranging to have my daughter handle all of my financial affairs. She is a C.P.A. and she already attends to the mind numbing income tax reporting. She will oversee all of my various monthly income sources and keep track of my bank account balances, as well as make sure my fixed expenses are paid on a timely schedule.

    I am a member of a rod and gun club in upstate New York. I go there on a regular basis to socialize with other fishermen. I don’t own any guns, just fishing gear.
    I’m almost sure that the readers believe this post. I know that the government has no reason to consider me to be dangerous because it has no evidence that I have firearms.
    (sarc. sw, off)

    • T. MacArthur January 30, 2017, 7:13 am

      It doesn’t apply to you anyway. Anyone can let someone else handle their finances if they want to. Obama’s idiocy only applies to people whose SS or VA money is sent directly to a representatine payee (RP). That doesn’t mean just someone you personally have given your finances over to. An RP is a person who receives and controls your SS or VA money because the government (SS or VA) has decided that you can’t safely handle it yourself, and has decided that you have to have an RP.

  • Campbell A King April 22, 2016, 2:38 pm

    Good for Senator Paul and thank you..I’m 68 and don’t want this muslim taking anything from me,

  • Boss April 22, 2016, 12:17 pm

    The occupy Whitehouse sock puppet jihadist illegally used executive action to create law, I would conjecture any one of those illegally deprived of their constitutional 2A rights could sue the occupy Whitehouse sock puppet jihadist directly.
    you cannot sue OWSPJ doing his lawful duty but I think you can for anything outside his purview.
    Like if he hit you with his car.

    “Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms” – Aristotle

    • JEFF MCKEVITT April 25, 2016, 12:58 pm

      I am prior USMC and agree with you wholeheartedly!! That is what this country needs!

  • Daniel Stewart April 22, 2016, 10:29 am

    It says in the constitution not to infringe on or gun rights. NYS, Jersey, California all are violating the infringe portion of the 2A rights. Take the leaders of these states out and hang them as enemies domestic. It’s your duty to do so.

    • T. MacArthur January 30, 2017, 7:39 am

      A: No they aren’t. How the constitution applies to laws is determined by the courts, and the courts have said that “reasonable regulation” of firearms is constitutional. So they aren’t violating the constitution. Unfortunately, that “reasonable” bit is the problem. What is “reasonable” regulation, and what is unreasonable? The courts have thrown out laws like those in DC and other places which, disguised as regulation, have the effect of preventing people from having guns. Hopefully, in the future they’ll also throw out those “may issue” laws that let the police decide if someone has a “need”, like in NYC where basically nobody gets a carry permit unless they need it for their job or are a retired NYC cop. Or like California, where either anyone who meets the basic legal requirements (is not a “restricted person”) gets one or nobody gets one depending on which county you live in. But until the courts say different, those places aren’t violating the constitution. Only the courts, not you or me, get to decide what is or isn’t constitutional.

      B: Your post advocates violence against legally elected or appointed officials. You tell people it’s their duty. That, my friend, is not only stupid, it’s illegal. Under current law, it might even be considered advocating or encouraging terrorism. You really need to be careful about what you say. The internet isn’t nearly as anonymous as you seem to think it is. Any time you post anything you leave an electronic trail which someone with a warrant can trace right back to you.

  • Claude Duncan April 22, 2016, 9:45 am

    Obama is mentally incompetent should not be around guns. So all of his body guards needs to be stripped of the guns they have for him and his family, his family is no important than mine. I say all guns should be stripped away for all these washington people first, then we will talk about my guns.

  • Robert K April 22, 2016, 9:27 am

    Gary, you are lucky, took me 21 months to get my pistol permit in NYS. It is terrible here, cannot wait for a new governor.

  • ANTHONY MASSA April 22, 2016, 9:07 am


  • Gary M. April 22, 2016, 8:58 am

    Glad to see Sen. Paul fighting for 2A rights. Having gone through the process of obtaining first a standard gun permit in NYS (took 14 months of waiting)and then after a year, a Concealed Carry permit, I have to ask, if on appeal, and a person was falsely adjudicated as mentally defective and as the proposed laws states :”will be notified and have their rights restored”. Will 1. His/her actual weapons be returned to him or her and 2. will he/she immediately get back whatever permits he/she was legally in possession of prior to the false adjudication? Since individual states now control the permitting process, one can only imagine the roadblocks a state such as NYS would still place in front of this person. Sen. Paul is on the right track, but needs to do more! States who are clearly anti-gun will claim State’s Rights on this issue, effectively making Sen. Paul’s legislation mute!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend