What started as a push for the VA may now be spreading into America at large, if the Obama Administration has its way. Spurred on by Sandy Hook and other mass shootings, the administration is now pushing for expanding background checks to those who receive Social Security disability checks. Depending on the interpretation, this could affect up to 4.2 million adults, according to the Los Angeles Times.

A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to “marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease.”

There is no simple way to identify that group, but a strategy used by the Department of Veterans Affairs since the creation of the background check system is reporting anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary.

If Social Security, which has never participated in the background check system, uses the same standard as the VA, millions of its beneficiaries would be affected. About 4.2 million adults receive monthly benefits that are managed by “representative payees.”

So, while admitting that this is something that the VA has been actively involved in doing, the administration is looking to strip people of their Second Amendement rights if they can’t handle their own affairs. Many disabled veterans have been flagged in background checks as a result. How many people will the Obama Administration’s new dragnet snare?

The motivation, the article says, is the administration’s desire to satisfy their itching need to “fix” something after the massacre at Sandy Hook. The problem is, of course, the killer (whose name I refuse to mention, as it should be blotted out forever) never purchased a gun and never had to pass a background check. His mother was the gun owner. When he stole her guns and murdered her, that was just the first of many laws that he broke. So, if this new proposal would not have stopped the killer, then what is the purpose of pushing a background check and a new rule like this?

As the mother of an “intellectually disabled” son, why does my gut scream that this is a way to seize guns from parents who are the caretakers of their disabled children? While my son (who is still a young minor) will probably never exercise his Second Amendment rights, isn’t that a decision that his father and I should make, as his legal caretakers, and then exercise our own rights accordingly?

I can hear the arguments now, that it is “unsafe” to have guns in the home with someone who can’t intellectually grasp their dangers. Well, I don’t keep the knives or the scissors locked up, but no one seems to worry about that. He knows that they are tools, not toys, and ones with very specific purposes that he is not always allowed to use. Why is a gun any different?

And if this new rule goes into effect, we can expect the same kind of government efficiency that veterans have received.

Since 2008, VA beneficiaries have been able to get off the list by filing an appeal and demonstrating that they pose no danger to themselves or others.

But as of April, just nine of 298 appeals have been granted, according to data provided by the VA. Thirteen others were pending, and 44 were withdrawn after the VA overturned its determination of financial incompetence.

Disability advocacy groups, as well as the NRA, have said that they would fight this rule change. I certainly hope so. The Obama Administration is bound and determined to have some kind of gun control before the end of his second term, and it looks like they will try and find a backdoor way to do it. Parents and patriots need to pay attention, before being disabled or having a disabled child is criteria enough to ban anyone’s rights.