Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: New PTSD Rules Relax Definition

  1. #1
    Super Moderator 63DH8's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Parkland, WA
    Posts
    961

    New PTSD Rules Relax Definition

    http://www.military.com/news/article...0&ESRC=army.nl


    July 12, 2010
    Military.com|by Bryant Jordan

    Under a new process for claiming post-traumatic stress disorder, veterans will no longer have to engage in actual combat to make the case they suffered psychologically in war. Instead, the new policy recognizes that living with the fear of death and injury may be enough for troops to develop mental health issues.

    "With this new PTSD regulation we are acknowledging the inherently stressful nature of the places and circumstances military services, in which the reality and fear of hostile or terrorist activities is always present," Michael Walcoff, acting undersecretary for benefits for the VA, said during a press conference this morning at the VA headquarters in Washington DC.

    Veterans will not have to cite specific incidents of stress -- a firefight or rocket attack, for instance -- and then back up the claim with documentation. Instead, veterans will now have only to show that he or she served in a combat zone and had a job consistent with conditions related to their PTSD symptom. Walcoff said many more veterans will now be able to file claims for PTSD, including troops who did not have direct contact with the enemy.

    As a group, he said, women will be among the major beneficiaries because their military records often did not reflect combat experience, he said. Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said doctors, nurses and other troops in the medical care specialties often are witness to trauma even if they do not see the combat themselves. Other support troops also find themselves in particularly stressful roles, he said, specifically citing convoy drivers who routinely make their way along roads where roadside bombs have likely been placed.

    "Knowing you're a truck driver going up and down the airport road every day, you're gripping that steering wheel intensely," he said.

    Joseph Violante, legislative director for the Disabled American Veterans, told the press conference that the changes were welcome and that DAV had been pushing for the more relaxed rules for decades.

    Many veterans were never able to successfully file a claim, he said, because they could not prove the stresses to the satisfaction of VA doctors in the past.

    The new rules are retroactive, Walcoff said, so that any veteran from any past war may file a claim. This includes vets who previously were denied a claim, he said.

    While there has been some concern that the new rules might create fraud -- primarily vets claiming PTSD for incidents that did not occur -- Walcott said the VA's overriding concern is getting care to those who do need and deserve it.

    The VFW's Joe Davis said there will always be some who try to cheat, but that shouldn't obscure the fact the new rules will help a great many people.

    "The overwhelming good this decision will produce outweighs the impact of a few cheaters who may attempt to game the system," he said. "We fully expect the VA to catch and prosecute them."
    Copyright 2010 Military.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  2. #2
    Senior Member L1A1Rocker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    TX Hill Country
    Posts
    3,421
    Do you think PTSD will be listed on NICS as a reason to deny gun purchases?
    US Constitution: Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 4

    The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization

  3. #3
    Senior Member mriddick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Not under current rules and if they tried I would hope constitutionally anyone denied their rights would file suit under the due process clause.

  4. #4
    Senior Member L1A1Rocker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    TX Hill Country
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by mriddick View Post
    Not under current rules and if they tried I would hope constitutionally anyone denied their rights would file suit under the due process clause.
    Hopefully they would win BUT, SCOTUS in Heller indicated that bans do to mental disorder may be resonable. I see the gungrabers loosing big time all over the country on the merits of their laws. I also see a shift in the grabbers approach to gun prohibition efforts.

    Make all transactions go through NICS
    Expand laws that prevent gun ownership - elivate misdomeners to felonies
    Mandate that mental disorders be included in NICS
    Expand the mental disorders that prevent gun ownership

    Just my thoughts.
    US Constitution: Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 4

    The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization

  5. #5
    swampdragon
    Guest
    I don't know man.
    The whole "mental disorder" thing is highly subjective I think.
    It falls right in line with denying felons gun rights.

    For instance, if I went to jail for a white collar crime where no violent behavior of any sort was involved....should my gun rights be stricken for ever?
    Alaska for example is looking at giving back gun rights to felons who served their time, that were NOT involved in a "violent" crime.
    I actually agree with that.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator 63DH8's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Parkland, WA
    Posts
    961
    PTSD isn't a mental disorder per say. It's the brain's mechanism to protect it self from past traumatic experiences.

  7. #7
    Moderator & Team Gunsnet SILVER 01/2011 AKTexas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Most North City of Mexico
    Posts
    7,826
    It took my dad 15 years to get his disability and his 100% from the VA.He was diagnosed with PTSD and something else related to his service in Viet Nam.

    My dad is one person that does not ever need a firearm in his possession long term.
    NRA, TSRA, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA
    BEING THE MODERATOR OF THE ROADHOUSE IS LIKE BEING THE JANITOR OF A PEEP SHOW.




  8. #8
    Senior Member L1A1Rocker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    TX Hill Country
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by swampdragon View Post
    I don't know man.
    The whole "mental disorder" thing is highly subjective I think.
    It falls right in line with denying felons gun rights.

    For instance, if I went to jail for a white collar crime where no violent behavior of any sort was involved....should my gun rights be stricken for ever?
    Alaska for example is looking at giving back gun rights to felons who served their time, that were NOT involved in a "violent" crime.
    I actually agree with that.
    I agree with ya 100%. The problem I see is that this will be the tack that the grabbers take and we should be ready to fight that battle when it comes.
    US Constitution: Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 4

    The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization

  9. #9
    Senior Member mriddick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Due process and Heller would (should?) mean you'd have to be found individually unable to own a firearm due to whatever the condition is. You should not be able to lose any right granted by the Constitution by merely being in a group of some sort. They can't come out and say people with PTSD don't get to own firearms anymore then they could say people with red hair can't.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by mriddick View Post
    Due process and Heller would (should?) mean you'd have to be found individually unable to own a firearm due to whatever the condition is. You should not be able to lose any right granted by the Constitution by merely being in a group of some sort. They can't come out and say people with PTSD don't get to own firearms anymore then they could say people with red hair can't.
    I don't know, "they" seem to be getting to the point where "they" can do what they want.

  11. #11
    Junior Member rice paddy daddy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    On a dirt road in N.E. Fla
    Posts
    16
    I recieved on going treatment from the VA for PTSD for years, up until about 15 years ago. I never applied for a service connected disability, so I don't know if that keeps me under the radar, but I have never failed a background check to buy a firearm.
    I do not plan to file now, either, because the less I have to do with the government the better. Besides, I saw in the paper the other day where the VA has tried Extasy (sp?) as treatment for PTSD! I wouldn't take their drugs then, I darn sure wouldn't put that crap in my body now.

  12. #12
    It's been about 20 some years since I let my FFL expire. But if I remember right, there are some questions on the application, and on the 4473's about if you have ever been treated for any kind of mental disorder.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •