Opinion
W Springfield, Virginia –-(Ammoland.com)-Gun Owners of America have uncovered a form that the FBI uses for people to permanently add themselves to the prohibited person list in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
The FBI document that is entitled, “NICS Indices Self-Submission Form,” allows Americans to “voluntarily” waive their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Once the person submits the form, they cannot get their rights back.
The waiver of rights states, “I may not be permitted to withdraw my name and information in the future.”
NICS Indices Self-Submission Form
The person filling out the form has to choose between reasons. The first choice is that they are a danger to themselves or others. The Second item that they can check states that the person in question lacks mental capacity adequately to contract or manage the details of their life.”
The first option is reminiscent of the language used in the so-called “Red Flag” laws or “extreme risk protection orders.” These laws lack due process, and pro-gun groups have used them as an example of the government pushing an overreaching and constitutionally dubious gun law across the country. Right now these laws are only at the state level.
The form also requires that a “mental health professional” signs off that the person in question “has adequate mental capacity voluntarily to execute this document.” What is striking about this is how a person could have the mental capacity to sign away their rights, but not have the “mental capacity adequately to contract or manage the details of their life.” It seems contradictory.
There is nowhere in the form where the “mental health professional” has to certify that the patient under there care doesn’t have the mental capabilities to own firearms. It is only to confirm they are signing the document under a sound mind and body. Gun rights advocates worry about possible abuses because of how the certification is worded in the form.
The FBI and ATF are using these forms to target gun owners that are seeking help for mental health problems but do not fall under the guidelines of a prohibited person under federal law. Anti-gun doctors or anti-gun family members can push this document on a gun owner in their time of crisis, taking advantage of them in a weakened mental state.
Gun Owners of America are concerned that family members or doctors could coerce the holder of the firearm into giving up their natural-born right to bear arms. Many Americans seek mental help and temporarily turn over their guns to their family members, friends, or a pro-second amendment organization like Hold My Guns until they are in a better mental place. This way the government is not involved and the gun owner doesn’t lose their Constitutional right.
With the FBI option, even when the person is in a better mental place, they would not be able to get their rights back. That scares gun-rights activists and subverts due process. It could put those left vulnerable due to mental illness in a precarious position.
This form also faces some tough legal hurdles, as pointed out by Rob Olson, Chief Legal Counsel for Gun Owners of America.
For example, 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(4) prohibits from gun possession anyone “who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution.” The keywords in that statute are “adjudicated” and “committed.” A court adjudicates and commits a person and not the person themselves.
Someone cannot designate themselves a felon. The person in question must meet the legal definition of a felon before being added as a prohibited person into NICS. Simply believing one’s self to “be a danger to myself or others” or to “lack mental capacity” does not count under federal law and does not disqualify a person from gun ownership.
Another issue is the language about being unable to “manage the details of my life,” is so vague that it could apply to anyone who hires a C.P.A. to fill out his taxes. It is also remarkably similar to the Obama Administration’s use of the Social Security Administration and the Veterans Administration to report to NICS anyone who used a representative to handle their finances. Notably, both houses of Congress and the President “disapproved” of this tactic, halting its use by the SSA.
GOA has filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents about the number of times patients have used the forms and under what circumstances the patients have applied them.
As of this writing, the FBI has acknowledged the receipt of the FIOA request, but the law enforcement agency has not responded with the requested information.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at www.crumpy.com.
This has to be a joke. Enticing someone to sign away their rights for life, when they’ve got a temporary illness like depression is evil.
Just started seeing Bloomy ads on TV. We need to raise a stink – that no one can believe his gun control credentials until he makes this form a requirement of employment for ALL his employees (and contractors) and proves that his form has been entered into the system.
Of course, then a disgruntled employee can sue him for deprivation of rights. While he can no longer hire bodyguards and possibly pay the ultimate price for it.
The battle between good and evil, or as I prefer; the life principal vs the death principle, or just positive vs negative, is the only war that exists. Or has ever existed. Or ever can exist, since they are two polar opposites. One cannot exist without the other, just as no current can ever flow from the negative pole of a battery, without a connection (a circuit) back to the positive pole. Polar opposites are two sides of the same coin. One side cannot exist without the other. This war can never end. There are always evil men looking to… Read more »
Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark (who is running for AZ senate) shoot AR’s all the time, yet want to ban them for everyone else. Send them these forms, and demand they sign them on TV and prove they have submitted them to the ATF. And every politician pushing gun control should give up their own right before attempting to infringe on anyone else’s. (There should be another form for politicians stating they pledge never to have armed security at taxpayer or private expense).
Best idea I have seen. Let the gun control lead the way by signing these forms for ownership for themselves and security if they want to really send a message. Wonder how many would, although many politicians constantly ignore the oath they took to defend the Constitution.
Arizona, How do you know they shoot ARs? Not questioning you, just wondering. Are there photos online somewhere? Could be some meme worthy material. And I like your idea of having the gun banners sign away their rights before they ask me to relinquish my own. I doubt many, if any would.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjFYrtvJMjc
I LOVE that idea! Let’s get it rolling!Start with Governator Northam.
CL, It’s a good place to start, but irrelevant. If all the politicians, all the Democrats and everyone else in the world gave up their right to be armed, I wouldn’t. It’s that simple. It’s not up for discussion or vote. That’s the nature of Given by their Creator. Everybody gets to choose the hill they die on, this one’s mine.
That isn’t really the point. The point is that we know they will refuse, thus exposing their hypocrisy for all to see, with no way to excuse it using yet more lies.
Ponder this……. If someone is incapable of making decisions concerning their everyday life, wouldn’t it also render them incapable of making the decision to sign this form unless they were coerced or forced to sign under duress? The very concept of this is dubious at best and likely nefarious in truth!
How can a person not capable of making decisions make the decision to sign this form and wave a Constitutionally underwritten natural right? And here is a hint for you. If you want to find a “mental health professional” in the Yellow pages try looking under the following categories: “Snake Oil Dealer;” “Faith Healer,” “Chicken Hide Tanner;” “Photon Torpedo Mechanic………………………”
Next we’ll hear about a Government form for citizens to add themselves to the Sex Offender List or the Dangerous Felon List and maybe even the Suicide by BATFE List where you can arrange to have the BATFE raid your home and murder your family and you and burn your house.
@JPM, Yes, convenient one stop pillaging!
@JPM: Shades of “Waco” and “Ruby Ridge”!!!!!!!!!!!
Laddyboy: There will most likely be more examples than Waco and Ruby Ridge.
JPM: That is not necessary, as the enforcers of our public servants can raid at will now.
Yup. Now gummit seems to be OK with one deciding, upon evidence onely THEY know, tha ttheyare female when six billion people on the planet would take one quick look “down there’ and instantly conclude MALE. Once one makes the turn down the rabbit hole, there is no telling WHERE one might end up. Anyone else think Lewis Carroll was prescient about just how insane people can realy get and pass themselves off as normal? At least the Mad Hatter had an explanation for HIS condition. THose days no one understood mercury poisoning, and hatters used mercury and thus gradually… Read more »
What’s really a pisser is when you meet that girl at a bar, she looks like a girl in every way that you can “see” and then you take her home and get a big surprise when “she” takes off “her” panties and she says “I was just born with a rather large clitoris.” OMG! No, I’ve been married for 43 years and she bore 4 sons so she doesn’t have this “issue”.
Hmmm…that already was done once. The guy was running a church in Waco Texas or something.
Maybe criminals or democrats will use this form to self-report themselves.
Bloomberg should demand that all of his followers and backed politicians sign away their rights to arms and do so himself. Lead by example.
@USA, Hmmm … a psychoanalyst, a lawyer, and a hooker all go into a Home Depot … there has got to be a joke in there somewhere!
They wrote a song about it, except it was a teacher, preacher and hooker. Swap out the parts for the shrink, lawyer and keep the hooker and it should work.
Sounds like you worked at Homey Depot, not Home Depot.
Add another UNCONSTITUTIONAL SO CALLED LAW.
Why would any idiot do this?.
The Fat Boys’ Institute talks people into things when the person is vulnerable or just lie, then claims it was a knowing and informed decision.
Democrats who are “true believers” would probably proudly sign away their rights as a way of virtue signaling, But the “leaders” only preach it. We should send stacks of these forms to MSNBC. CNN, abc, cbs, the AP, Reuter’s, etc and demand they prove their commitment by signing away their rights. Bet none of the anchors would do it. They’re all hypocrites and have personal firearms, or security, but don’t want the rest of us to be armed. Send one to Diane Feinstein. She tries to pass bans every year, while holding a permit herself since the 1970’s!
Unconstitutional laws best be known and called Acts of oppression.
Same reason that idiots like you file your taxes every year. The income tax is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, not only did the SCOTUS state it but it has been proven that there is NO LAW on the books that mandates filing, yet you do it because of intimidation! Every year you voluntarily comply with government fraud!
@Rattler, Do you file your income taxes? Because a lot of famous people and not so famous people have gone to prison over it. And Merry Christmas.
Dealing in fed notes themselves is voluntary fraud! If we all insisted on utilizing what Judge Roger Sherman had put in the Constitution our economy wouldn’t be on a continual roller coaster ride. Articles one Sections 8 & 10 can be attributed to him. And yet WHAT state adheres to NO STATE SHALL MAKE ANYTHING OTHER THAN GOLD AND SILVER COIN A TENDER IN PAYMENT OF DEBT????
@CL, I understand that pursuant to the Constitution and US Code, only silver and gold are “money”, but what do you mean “Dealing in fed notes themselves is voluntary fraud!”?
Because all fiat currency is fraud. We call currency “money”, but it is not. They are two different things, thus the two different words.
As in that three part pamphlet I posted some weeks back. Lots of the background is in this also:
https://barnesreview.org/product-tag/money/
@Knute Knute, I understand that it is fiat currency, but why is it fraud? The government does not refer to it as money. They tell you up front that it is a note. I have an older $100 bill that states on it “Payable in lawful money.” Everyone should know, by now, that this stuff is just paper with interesting pictures on it.
So where is the fraud? Who is defrauding whom?
@wjd, Yeah, me too. Converting paper with interesting pictures on it for real stuff.
My concern with the form, isn’t that some people may wish to file the form and withdraw from being able to purchase a firearm, that is their choice, be it a stupid one in my opinion.
My concern is that someone else may forge a form on someone that they didn’t like and file it with the NCIS, with out that person being aware of it . Then they go to buy a firearm and find out that they are permanently stopped from ever buying a firearm for the rest of their lives
That was the first thing I thought of.
AND have to hire expensive attorneys to look into the fraud and get it fixed. Or worse yet, someone with your name files one and the morons at NICS get it mixed up with you. Which still would mean an expensive legal battle. Naaa…they never make any mistakes!
@CL – My thought about “may not be able to restore rights” related to mistakes as well. Presumably like the terrorist watch lists / no fly lists – there are multiple different copies under several jurisdictions. They periodically share info – so that anyone on one list is automatically copied onto all the lists. In order to be successfully removed from “the list”, one must be removed from all copies (and backups thereof) simultaneously. Given that government won’t share where all the copies are, that feat is neigh impossible. NICS list is similarly designed to be an entry only system… Read more »
Again, we see the federal government and their quislings in the private sector are not comprehending what “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” means. It is past time for us to force government back into its constitutional framework and physically remove anti-liberty individuals and groups from ouur society, permanently.
How do we “force” them? By utilizing the REASON for the 2nd amendment?
This is nothing more than UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS doing what they do best. BY-PASSING the RULE OF LAW!!! The ATF appointed bureaucratic department which is NOT controlled by Congress, was ILLEGALLY STARTED UP BY THE IRS!!! It MUST be DISBANDED!!
Disbanding any such enforcement agency would be of no effect, as they are servants of our public servants. The enforcement officers of any disbanded agency would be dispersed among other enforcement agencies. The edicts of our public servants would still be enforced upon us. It is disgusting that our government equates firearms with the “sins” of alcohol and tobacco by naming the ATF. The preferred method of disbanding at least the Firearm Division is to repeal the laws that gave pretense for its establishment. The enforcers of the A and T could still go around being called T-Men (women or… Read more »
We have allowed our public servants to establish an underclass of free citizens. Our servants have increased the reasons to prohibit people from exercising rights. It is not surprising that our servants request citizens to voluntarily deny their own rights. It is no surprise that citizens are being coerced or fooled into denying their own rights. By the power of citizens giving our servants the authority to deny rights to individual free citizens, our servants are taking power. What is surprising is that we are allowing this to happen to us.
You are 100% correct! https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=never+talk+to+the+police
This may not have any relevance on the subject, but my dad was on our local school board when I was a kid, back in the early 1970’s. I played high school sports, and we always had to sign a form, saying that we would hold the school not responsible if we were hurt or killed playing badmitton or football, or what ever sport we played. My dad told me that their school board lawyer said that the form was not worth the paper it was drawn up on. He said that a person could not sign their rights away.… Read more »
True, one can not sign one’s God-given rights away. That form back in your school days was most likely an “indemnify and hold harmless” ageement, that if you DID get hurt you agreed not to hold the school at fault, which is probably correct anyway,. What did the school DO that led to your injury? Let you on to the property? Most families would have their own medical covereage for that busted leg or tennis elbow or maybe getting whacked in the head by a careless player when he let go the bat, which then found your head. But signing… Read more »
You are absolutely correct. The word UNALIENABLE as used by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence definition UNALIENABLE. The state of a thing or right which cannot be sold. Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are UNALIENABLE. Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition “Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523: You can… Read more »
Going to foundational authoritative sources … good for you. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Firearm.
CL, Ding, Ding, Ding. You get today’s prize for cogent thinking and doing better than DAGS. I’m serious, and impressed. Merry Christmas (not Xmas).
I note the words “may not” in regards to rescinding the action of the document. Note it does NOT say “CAN NOT” or “SHALL NOT”. Although it is clear that when one has their handgun stolen by the coppers to hold “for investigative purposes’ you MAY not ever see it again. Some do, some don’t, depending…… as ever, government language always provides back doors and loopholes. Bottom line, this form as written can NOT fully abandon one’s rights, any more than a similar form could enable one to forever forsake their right to free speech, to print what they wll,… Read more »
I know of another document that states “shall not be infringed” ,but is pissed on by every form of state and federal government. I don’t see the subsection in the Bill Of Rights that mentions mental health, felons, or restraining orders ect… The entire F in BATF is unconstitutional.
I’d be OK with prohibiting select people under rather limited circumstances, were it not for all the evidence that the “camel’s nose” effect applies. Given that effect, I see it as critical to absolutely oppose all infringements, no matter how small.
Well, that is freedom of choice.
If one is a nut and knows it, more power to him. I like to see an avenue to get the right back if one gets better over time.
The ATF keep saying that congress is not allowing the funds for them to reinstate rights as it is. It is almost impossible to have a name removed because of errors. Once one is degrade in to lessor status than our public servants our servants want to keep it that way (the more the better for them).
Yea, it should cost a FORTUNE to turn on the computer, go to the program, uncheck the box and then turn on the porn sites for at work entertainment. Geezzzz….
@CL, That is the best thing that you have ever written.
Is this form in current use or an in-process proposal? I note that the example provided has no gov’t form number.
Austin: Now that’s a good catch. In the story: “Gun Owners of America have uncovered a form that the FBI uses…”, the operative word being “uses”, which would indicate already in the process of. However, and not to slight the author, there may be a grammatical error, in that it should read “…..a form that the FBI is proposing to use…”. That would be a question for either Mr. Crump or GOA.
@Austin, Maybe the Fat Boy Institute did not assign a form number so as to keep the form a secret as long as possible. I wonder what else they are keeping secret.
We believe that it is currently in use
Austin: This might be just added as question on Form 4473. Such as: Do you renounce your right to accept this firearm and to posses any other?
Unfortunately, what the lawyers of the GOA, NRA and many others don’t understand—or don’t want to understand—is the unconstitutionality of the legislative powers currently held by the executive and judicial branches which cause most of our legal issues surrounding the Second Amendment. And yes, I am an expert on the Constitution. Article 1, Section 1, Sentence 1 of the Constitution—literally the very first words following the preamble—only permits Congress to pass laws at the federal level. This was done to ensure we had only one body of elected representatives to hold accountable otherwise the people yield no power. In other… Read more »
Please post the hookers name and phone number. Don’t ask me if I’m joking because I’m not.
………..
Who ever would fill out a form like that for themselves probably doesn’t deserve the right to Bear Arms. No different if you were to renounce your citizenship & leave the country….Don’t every come back!
Obviously YOU don’t have the intelligence to understand what this article presented! It stated that there are certain circumstances when an individual is having issues in their life that causes them mental stress and this form could be forced on them in exchange for them receiving treatment. There are times when a person may have either physical or mental issues that are severe enough (intense pain from disease or injury, problems coping with a loss in the family, excessive stress in the workplace, etc.) that they would sign virtually anything to be able to get the care they need.