Andy Reynolds - Getty Images

How old was the dirtbag that shot up the elementary school in Newtown Connecticut? Do you remember? Well you’d better look into it because President Obama is using the horror of that day to take guns away from Social Security recipients that have someone else look after their money. No, I’m not joking and yes I am being serious.

You see if you have someone else take care of your money because you’re not good with money or just old fashioned forgetful you could be deemed ‘incompetent’ and therefore you would forfeit your right to own a gun.

It makes perfect sense doesn’t it? I mean using the Newtown tragedy to take guns from pensioners is like- well is like… I guess I can’t actually make a credible comparison, sorry.

The LA Times reports that a ban on gun possession due to inability to handle finances would be sweeping; that it would cover those who are unable to manage their own affairs for a multitude of reasons–from “subnormal intelligence or mental illness” to “incompetency,” an unspecified “condition,” or “disease.” I think that the word condition could be construed to define just about everyone, including myself. I sometimes wonder what condition my condition is in. In fact often.

Yale Psychologist Dr. Marc Rosen has seen this same tact used on US veterans and warns that those applying it to guns under the presumption that needing help with financial management equates to incompetence or violent tendencies are simply mistaken. Rosen made clear in saying, “Someone can be incapable of managing their funds but not be dangerous, violent or unsafe. They are very different determinations.” It seems Dr. Rosen doesn’t fully appreciate the agenda or the narrative of the left. I would suggest he may be borderline on gun ownership because of his clear and pervasive ‘condition’ of just not getting it.

The Times meanwhile, further provides an example of 30-year-old US Marine Steve Overman. He requires help with his finances because of “weakened..memory and cognitive ability” resulting from a roadside bomb in Iraq. The “VA eventually deemed him 100% disabled and after reviewing his case in 2012 declared him incompetent, making his wife his fiduciary.”

Because of this The Times reports, he had to get his guns out of his house–taking them a relative’s home–in order to avoid losing them. This same scenario could play out again–millions of times–if the Social Security Administration uses the “mental defective” categorization that the VA uses.

Make no mistake this is naked aggression against old folks and their Constitutional rights. Under this one category alone, approximately “2.7 million” Social Security beneficiaries could lose gun rights. It would happen with one stroke of the Executive Action pen.

It is funny how the left will carry on about how Obama is not ‘out to get guns from lawful gun owners’. Of course not, he’s  just working to make sure there is no such thing as a ‘lawful gun owner’, outside of the law enforcement and military community. While he’s headed in that direction he will also do his best to artificially raise the cost of ammunition and increase excise fees and taxes on existing firearms.

By they way the guy who killed all of those people in Newtown was 20 years old. I am no expert but I am pretty sure banning Social Security recipients from getting guns wouldn’t have changed a thing.