Johnson, Abraham & Grassley Move to Overturn Obama’s Social Security Gun Ban

Social Security Recipients
Johnson, Abraham & Grassley Move to Overturn Obama's Social Security Gun Ban
Gun Owners of America
Gun Owners of America

USA – Congressmen Sam Johnson (R-TX) and Ralph Abraham (R-LA) — and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) in the Senate — have introduced resolutions to overturn Barack Obama's Social Security Gun Ban.

As a senior citizen myself … and as one who owns several firearms that I want to pass on as an inheritance to my children one day … this legislation is very important to me.

But first, a little background.

As he was going out the door, Barack Obama made one final obscene gesture to the Second Amendment community.

That gesture consisted of a rule which would troll the Social Security rolls and identify recipients whose checks were processed by a guardian.

Once these people were identified, their names would be inputted into the NICS system, and their guns would be taken away.

Ralph Abraham (R-LA)
Ralph Abraham (R-LA)

Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie — who is chairman of the House Second Amendment Task Force — minced no words in describing Obama's rule. This week, Rep. Massie told GOA that:

If you want to see how ruinous this policy will be to seniors, look at the over one hundred thousand veterans who have been stripped of their Second Amendment rights under a similar procedure through the Department of Veterans Affairs. This ruling is yet another attempt to hurt gun owners and bypass due process. Our seniors deserve better than that.

In places like New York and California, with their gun confiscation programs, SWAT teams could be sent to the homes of Social Security recipients who were identified under the Obama rule.

Our experience is that most gun owners don't have $10-20,000 lying around to hire a lawyer and appeal the ruling.

This process was promulgated pursuant to the “NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007” — which is also known as the “Veterans Disarmament Act”.

Gun Owners of America opposed that bill because, as we predicted, it would legitimize gun bans against veterans, and would soon be applied to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid recipients as well.

Tragically, that prediction has now come to pass.

But the passage of the Johnson/Abraham resolution in the House (H.J.Res. 40) — and of the Grassley resolution in the Senate (S.J.Res 14) — will obliterate that anti-gun rule from the law.

And, because it is being passed under a special procedure (called the Congressional Review Act), they will be considered under special parliamentary rules and cannot be filibustered in the Senate.

Thus, they will need only a majority vote in the Senate and the House, and President Donald Trump is sure to sign.

So please urge your Representative, Rep. Christopher Smith (R), to cosponsor H.J.Res. 40. And urge your two Senators to cosponsor Sen. Grassley's identical effort, S.J.Res. 14.

It will send a strong message if we can get a large number of cosponsors on this resolution.

Sincerely,

Larry Pratt
Executive Director Emeritus

About Gun Owners of America (GOA)

Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no compromise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul.

Visit: www.gunowners.org to Join.

10
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
7 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
Gregory RomeuSteven LemmWild BillMarkPATionico Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

It should have never been processed in the first place being that it is unconstitutional as an infringement of the Second Amendment RIGHT. Anybody that plays into these unconstitutional laws don’t realize that because they are unconstitutional on their face they are not a law and are wholey void. If you will abide by them and you agreed to them then you are a slave to them. If in your heart mind and soul you believe the law to be unconstitutional and therefore void then you are not in violation of any such law. But then again that depends on… Read more »

Steven Lemm
Guest
Steven Lemm

What would be needed to get a policy initiated that would specifically deny weapons of any kind, including guns, to secret service agents, body guards or any security personnel who will or would be responsible for protecting anyone who uses their station, employment position, public office, etc. to deny the American citizen that which is guaranteed by our Constitution?
I, for one, am ready to vote on that.

MarkPA
Guest
MarkPA

The un-making of a regulation by the Executive branch may take as much effort as it took Obama to implement it. So, Trump probably an do it; but not necessarily much faster than Congress. I would like to see as much action by Congress as possible, rather than by Trump by EO. Trump will be criticized for using Executive Orders even though Obama was not criticized. Not much potential to register political points here. If Congress acts it will be a rebuke of Obama’s actions by means of an expression of the People’s will expressed through their representatives. As such,… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@MarkPA, I’d like to see Trump use his executive authority to clean out the executive branch of corrupt liberal/socialist/progressives who will attempt to hide in their positions, and undermine him. He can’t afford to leave this people in his rear area. Well, maybe Trump needs to do both.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

WHY are so many people dumbed-down to believe that they have to wait for an election to try and vote somebody out of office rather than use the power given them in their state constitution to remove a corrupt official from office by way of grand jury investigation and indictment for Wilful Neglect of Statutory Duty as per their Oath of Office?

Tionico
Guest
Tionico

Was this “rule” passed into law by Congress? No? Then Congress are not needed to undo it. Simple executive order, or, as suggested above, the Chief Executive Officer gets in the grille of the head of Social Security and that head faces a decision. Undo it permanently, or clean out his desk. No, on second thought, what’s in that desk is government property already. He gets none of it. Starting now. YOU decide, Buster…. stand or fold. And standing means you get folded.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

The reason that they are processing it through Congress as a loss so that it cannot be written as an executive order or, “rule” in future ministrations.

Also, even though most of us are not in the congressional or senatorial districts of those that are working these laws, we still need to make the effort to contact their offices and give them our support and thanks for stepping up to the plate and being true American Patriots as well as Larry Pratt and the Gun Owners of America.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

Why does it take an “Act “of Congress to negate a “rule” by an agency? Can’t Trump just order the Soc. Sec. Admin (SSA)to change their rule? Were I Trump, I would say to the head of SSA, ” Revoke the rule. You have one hour or you are fired. You can use the hour to preserve you job or clean out you desk, which ever you chose.”

Jacob M. Opperman
Guest
Jacob M. Opperman

Why can’t President Trump over turn obama back door bull sh*t why does it have to go thru the Senate and House. If obama can do this why not President Trump. I am tire of how obama can screw over the country and the people of this country by just signing his name. It is time that all of these idiot signing just be gone with the signing of one paper by our President Trump.

Big Lou
Guest
Big Lou

About time somebody took action against this stupid law. Now get it undone with no delay.