Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Should people drawing a SS check for 100% mental diability

Posted 12 years ago on March 2, 2012, 2:56 p.m. EST by HoarFriday (27)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

retain their voting rights?

They give up their second amendment rights.

24 Comments

24 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by badlimey (48) 12 years ago

Only if they can't spell disability.

[-] -1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty diability diability daibility diabilty

If you spell something wrong enough times, it's correct spelling changes.

Damnit ya Pome, everybody knows that! Whaddahell is rongwifu?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 12 years ago

why do people always mention other peoples typos? what relevance is it ever to anything in our discussion? Shall we make it a requirement in our constitution that if you mispell a word or your gramar is off, that you are automatically disqualified to be on the "good side?" Funny cause last I checked, I make more money than an Spelling teacher.

[-] 1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

I control the universe and have officially changed the spelling of the word, when it suits me!

I have been known, in consideration of enough graft, to issue others license to do so as well. ;-)

I actually thought badlimey's reply was funny.

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 12 years ago

ya i thought it was funny too, but i was thinking about in another forum topic i was having a discussion with DKAtoday and then at the end rather than adressing the points, the topic turned to why am I editing my post for grammar correction. I felt let down, and disappointed.

[-] 1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

Life would be grand if not for blood sucking ticks, poison ivy and a large number of people....

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

Do you (generic you) have any knowledge how mental disability is defined? Or the process for the people suffering such to receive disability from SS? That they are required to attend a physician (psychologist or psychiatrist) at the discretion and of the choosing of SS, periodically?

Keep on, showing the lack of information opinions are based on.

[-] -1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

What I know is that people who get the Nervous Dr to sign off on them being 100% mentally disabled, FOR ANY REASON, cannot own firearms.

Now the question is, should people who cannot legally own firearms, like felons even, be allowed to vote? Should people, in a coma and on life support be able to vote?

If you believe mentally disabled people should retain their voting rights, please explain why.

To answer your questions, Yes, I know the answers to all three.

[-] 2 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

I think perhaps, you should learn more about mental disability before you ask these questions.

[-] -1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

YOU, have no idea who I am or what I know, so stow your baseless assertions and empty suggestions.

I'd say you likely draw the crazy check and actually believe you should do that and retain your voting rights.

[-] 2 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

LOL, so you accuse me of making assumptions then make your own.

To be honest, I never received a government check with my name on it, not even an income tax return. I always had to pay in, even after paying quarterly. That's what happens when you're successful.

[-] -1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

That makes the cockles of my heart tingly! I may even be goose pimply!

I'll send down the order, in triplicate, to have a star pinned on you.

Now answer the simple question.

[-] 2 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

Just because some one is mentally disabled does not mean they are stupid or unable to understand the issues today. It depends on the type of disability and the severity of it.

So there is no pat answer.

I know of people who are currently mentally disabled due to accident and still able to own and use fire arms and who are most certainly intelligent enough to form an opinion about a political candidate and vote. I also know of people who are currently mentally disabled who should not be allowed in the same building as a fire arm and most certainly unable to intelligently form an opinion about a political candidate and vote.

There is no pat answer.

So now clarify or stop.

[-] -2 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

You know people who have been determined to be 100% mentally disabled, or even ever been institutionalized, that are allowed, by the federal government, to own firearms?

Really?

I don't believe you.

Do you own firearms that you have purchased from any licensed dealer?

Ever fill out the yellow sheet and put your thumb print on it?

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

Like I said, there are varying degrees of mental disability. Some are personality disorders some are not. A great many people who are mentally disabled are NOT dangerous to themselves or others, they merely can not function in a manner which allows them to maintain gainful employment.

Once again I suggest you gain some insite into the question before you ask it, for the purpose of clarification.

And yes I have purchased firearms from licensed dealers, and that is as far as your rudeness is taking you.

For that matter I am going to make another assumption about you. That your definition of fire arms is limited to semi and fully automatics of large caliber.

[-] 0 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

I'm not talking about varying degrees, I'm talking about 100% mental disability, enough to get a check without any physical disability factored in. Not 30% mental disability, 100% Cha-crazy-ching, send me a check, baby!!!

Your assumption shows you likely have never filled out and thumb-printed a yellow sheet for the ATF, as you are completely wrong.

The only thing excluded would be BLACK POWDER firearms.

Let me tell you one of the morals of this discussion, it's an easy way for many to be legally disarmed.

Go read the sheet you have to fill out to buy a small single shot shotgun or even 22 rifle. Pay attention to the actual words on the sheet that you sign and thumbprint. It's very clear.

Fully automatic, Class III stuff, is a completely different ball game, caliber matters not.

I'm quite sure you've never read those agreements as you'd know when you own ANYTHING class III, the atf can KICK YOUR DOOR in and enter your premises ANYTIME they fancy the notion.

Possessing anything class III, without the papers, assures one caught, 20 years MINIMUM, in federal prison.

[-] 0 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

You still fail to understand that a mental disability that concludes at 100% does not mean these people are not able to understand, have valid opinions and to be able to vote on their convictions.

As for the firearms question, I was very successful in demonstrating how easily you wander off topic and continue to make assumptions.

Just because I don't tell you something doesn't mean I don't know it. Like millions of other moderates I own guns of various caliber, I just feel no need to brag about it or put out that I've had to sign for ammunition or thumb print to obtain what I need or desire. Oh, by the way, caliber does matter, according to my Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer.

I am sorry your world view is so narrow. It must get very lonely there.

I will no longer respond to you in this thread. Your arguments do not remain in the realm of the topic.

[-] 0 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

100% mentally disabled does conclude that such a person can commit 1st degree murder and will not be tried as a sane person. They get 4 years in an institution, not life in prison or executed.

In fact, I believe convicted felons, who served their time and paid their debt (allegedly rehabilitated by our private prison institute) should actually have all their rights restored and indeed have more rights than a person certified 100% mentally disabled, and getting paid for it.

I'm sure you don't agree.

[-] 0 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

Your assertions or inferences........

"For that matter I am going to make another assumption about you. That your definition of fire arms is limited to semi and fully automatics of large caliber."

Wrong.

'semi-automatics and full automatics of a certain caliber are somehow classified differently by caliber size'

Wrong and shows a complete ignorance of ATF enforced laws.

'A person declared to be 100% mentally disabled can legally own firearms of some caliber'

Wrong, black powder only, just like a convicted felon and in some cases, not even that.

100% mentally disabled carries many implications, factually. There are reasons why any such persons are not allowed firearms ownership.

Should they be allowed to vote? No and without exception.

Do you want somebody 100% mentally disabled sitting on your jury of peers? An honest person most likely would not ever desire a jury panel of whack jobs who get a check because they are mentally defective and certified as such.

I suggest you find another dealer with an FFL, or better yet, read the FFL guidelines/rules put forth by the ATF.

It probably wouldn't matter, you seem very convinced of your misconceptions and incorrect beliefs that seeing them in black and white would likely not change your mind.

[-] 0 points by nucleus (3291) 12 years ago

There are more than a few people on this form with 100% mental disability ...

[-] 0 points by Riley2011 (110) from New Britain, CT 12 years ago

This is a great question Hoar. I have read that some people are now claiming these funds because they get falsely diagnosed to survive. It is sad, but some people are trying to get disability. What the hell...look how we have been voting...let em' vote...

[-] 0 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

Well, that seems to be the trouble with true democracy, the brighter upper 20% being crippled by the masses of average thinking people.

Factor in mental incompetents and even people who have never, and may not ever be able to, stand on their own two feet and make their own way in this world, and then the average masses are even crippled by the the least common denominator.

I'm not talking about money or financial astuteness either.

btw.... I love it when you call me Hoar.

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 12 years ago

Sure, why not? Anyone can get on disability for almost anything. That's one of the reasons SS is broke.

[-] 1 points by HoarFriday (27) 12 years ago

It takes a real trick bitch to get diability........

However, the flip side is that RETIRED people, with incomes over 1,000,000 a year get SS as if they needed it.

With 1mil a year income and retired, you can buy and pay for another persons organs and have them glued in your decrepit bag of bones.

Obviously, if you retired with 1mil a year retirement income, the USA has been good to you and it's time for many of those types to back away from the entitlement line.