View Single Post
Old 02-18-2018, 08:59 PM   #46
sexobon
I love it when a plan comes together.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,793
The rule adversely affected Americans with disabilities who depended on Social Security Disability payments. It potentially enabled their rights to be abridged without a court order just because they're disabled.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:
The rule would require that the Social Security administration report to the Attorney General recipients found to be disabled in order for them to be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.[2] To qualify for reporting, an individual would have had to meet two criteria:

• determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: Is a danger to himself or to others
•They have to be receiving full disability benefits and couldn't find work.
•They require the assistance of a third party to manage their own benefits
[BOLD MINE]

Boards, commissions, or other lawful authority get to effectively rescind privileges; but, not rights and certainly not because some administrative rule says they can.

It was an ill conceived rule, a typical knee jerk reaction by emotional sheeple trying, in their hysteria, to find a panacea by including provisions for bypassing the courts and eliminating due process.
sexobon is offline   Reply With Quote