Obama Announces Large-Scale Gun Grab That Will Affect 4.2 Million SSA Recipients


King Obama

Obama plans to extend gun background checks to Social Security. The administration will use the same strategy they use to confiscate guns from veterans who have others handle their financial affairs only this will affect a massive 4.2 million Americans.  An inability to balance a checkbook could get them banned from owning a gun.

What right does Barack Obama have to unilaterally make this decision affecting the Second Amendment? Our inherent right is becoming a government-given right.

This is the single most massive gun grab by this administration. If you are elderly, a veteran or disabled, you might have your gun taken away because of Obama’s big brush approach to gun control.

About 4.2 million adults receive monthly benefits that are managed by “representative payees” and they would all be subject to gun confiscation.

Gun rights activists, mental health experts, advocates for the disabled and others are critical of the plan, according to the LA Times.

Handling one’s financial affairs does not correlate to irresponsible gun ownership.

If Social Security recipients lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs for any reason and to any degree, they could lose their guns.

Americans who receive Social Security benefits could all have to choose between their government benefits and their guns.

Bearing Arms calls it “extortion” which “will deny gun rights to the largest possible segment of Americans possible by executive fiat, with little recourse for those affected.”

What he is doing is picking off the Second Amendment with vulnerable group after vulnerable group so there will be less resistance, if any.

George Mason, who co-authored the second amendment, said at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

The left is continually looking for ways to water down or eliminate the Second Amendment and they have been activated by the tragedy in Sandy Hook, an act committed by a deranged killer who used illegally-obtained guns to commit his crime.

In early June, anti-gun congressmen Senator Edward Markey of Massachusetts and Representative Carolyn Maloney of New York introduced legislation to authorize the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to give $60 million taxpayer dollars to anti-gun activists to conduct faux research proving gun violence is a disease which we all know is a lie.

Anti-gun activists already get countless millions from private foundations for research to prove gun violence is a disease. It is blatantly political and biased with the end goal being the promotion of an agenda to end a constitutional right.

In January, The Washington Post posted a scathing rebuke of the lack of government research for this transparently political agenda. They called the CDC “tainted” and pushed for both the CDC and The National Institute of Justice, an arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, to fund extensive gun control research.

If they also conducted research on right-to-carry laws, it might be acceptable.

After Sandy Hook, Barack Obama issued an Executive Order that lifted the ban on the government funding of gun research. He followed it up by giving $10 million to the CDC to study gun violence.

The doctor who oversees gun research, Mark Rosenberg, is anti-gun. The CDC report, however, backfired. It found, among other things, that armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker, gun control has mixed success, and mass shootings and accidental firearm deaths are rare and on the decline.

It also concluded that the vast majority of gun-related deaths are not homicides, but suicides.


In May, Maloney introduced a bill in the house – The Firearms Risk Protection Act – that would require legal gun owners to purchase liability insurance or face a $10,000 fine. It would ensure that only rich people have guns. It would particularly hurt blacks whose incomes are lower than whites.  She has introduced the bill before. She’s relentless and has said the laws will pass eventually.

Also in May, she introduced H.R. 2380, the so-called “Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2015.” This bill would require background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows. The end goal is to bring us closer to a gun registry and gun confiscation just as they are trying to confiscate guns from veterans and Social Security recipients.

In 2013 Maloney claimed she received death threats over the Firearms Risk Protection Act. It’s probably not true.


Our Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, was sworn in at the end of April after a long delay after he tweeted, “guns are a health care issue.”

When asked about it in April, he told NPR that “violence of all kinds is a public health issue” and that he wanted “to find a way that we can reduce violence in America. And I think you wouldn’t be hard-pressed to find parents or families of victims or health care practitioners who would disagree.”

He has a serious anti-gun history.

Vivek Murthy

Gun control activists were thrilled that he was finally confirmed though he promised at his hearing that he wouldn’t use the position to advocate against guns. That has yet to be seen and I wouldn’t take it to the bank.

“A big step for common sense: Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy was sworn in just a few minutes ago!” former Arizona U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’s group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, wrote on social media on Wednesday, the website Guns.com noted.

Meanwhile, all you Socials Security recipients who don’t handle your checkbooks, prepare to lose your guns.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
2 years ago

Bacon is the food of the gods

6 years ago

Well all I have to say to this bullshit is “from my cold dead hand” and I gladly display stickers on my front door (5.7×28) (7.62×39) and don’t tread on me so that any gun grabber will know that I have them and that the round in my guns are AP and they can try to take them if they like but the only thing I will give them is the whole fucking clip. Suck a dick you commy pussies, 1776 will commence again if u try to take the guns

6 years ago

Don’t worry, I’ve been inventing a few things that work better than the conventional gun and do not use bullets or even gun powder. 🙂

6 years ago

Another move by the muslim ” dictater want a be” with an amount of some dumb as DEMS following him right thru the gates of HELL. I hope.

6 years ago

I don’t believe that just because someone can’t balance a check book that they are dangerous, although we do have a lot of people in Washington who can’t balance a budget who are VERY dangerous. Regardless of that, these guns are property, and if these citizens are to be told they cannot own them, they should have the right to pass them on to friends or family members, or sell them like any other property. When someone is determined to be no longer able to drive due to age concerns, nobody is seizing their car. They are able to sell it or give it to someone of their choice.