Judge Rules Sheriff Illegally Revoked Veteran’s Gun Permit

Veteran's Gun Permit

Benjamin KrauseA Minnesota judge ruled that a sheriff’s revocation of a Marine veteran’s gun permit was an overreach and a violation of the vet’s Second Amendment rights.

Marine veteran Steven Eid was an honorably discharged Marine helicopter mechanic who served in the Iraq War. Following service, Eid sought health care from numerous VA and VA-approved facilities. He struggled to obtain the rehabilitative care he was owed and proceeded to file complaints with US Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s office.

Klobuchar’s staffers took offense to Eid’s numerous complaints against the inadequate health care he received from VA. In one email, Eid complained that he was considering suicide. In another, he told the staffer, “I am asking for your help before things get out of control.” He subsequently left a voice message on the subject that caused the staffer to falsely claim the veteran was threatening.

At the time, Klobuchar’s panicked staff filed a complaint with Capitol Police claiming the veteran’s complaints were perceived as “threatening.” The subsequent investigation was so alarming to Eid that he began carrying his gun out of fear of the detective investigating him.

Once alerted to the matter, Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek revoked the veteran’s gun permit. Eid hired attorney John Baker, a Marine veteran himself, to advocate for his Second Amendment rights.

Attorney Baker prevailed for his client, and the judge concluded Sheriff Stanek overstepped his authority. In short, they won. The veteran did not threaten anyone, despite Klobuchar’s overly sensitive staffers delicate ears and eyes.

I am quite pleased to see this result, not just because Attorney Baker is a friend, but because a veteran was successful going up against “the man” quite literally.

Sentimentality aside, what was Senator Amy Klobuchar thinking when her staff approached her with the issue? After all, is she not a trained attorney?

In my mind, this calls into question her entire position on veterans and their rights. Her refusal to call off the dogs following a common sense review of the matter possibly indicates a less than friendly position against veterans advocating for their own rights. We will see how her veteran position plays out this coming election cycle.

But, is this a sign it is time for Klobuchar to hit the road?

Here are the specifics of the judge’s position:

In an order released Friday, Hennepin County Judge Susan Robiner said Stanek should not have sought to revoke Eid’s gun permit. While refusing to fault law enforcement, she nonetheless said Stanek failed to meet the high standard for revocation under state law, which is “a substantial likelihood that the applicant is a danger to self or the public.”

This record identifies absolutely no one who has been directly threatened by Eid and no evidence that he has had any current suicidal ideation, much less threats of suicide,” Robiner ruled.

A spokeswoman from the sheriff’s department said state privacy laws regarding permits to carry firearms prohibited officials there from commenting on the case. Eid did not respond to a call for comment.

Eid’s attorney, John Baker, said the case is an example of how society, including law enforcement, often views Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans as broken and dangerous. Eid has never been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and has no criminal history.

“It’s overreaching by the sheriff, the same old scheduling problem by the VA, and the perception that all us veterans have PTSD and we’re all dangerous,” said Baker, himself a veteran who teaches classes to law enforcement on veterans in crisis.

Baker said he was told that Eid went to the Bloomington Police Department Friday after the order was issued to retrieve his confiscated weapons but that police refused to give them back.

“They’re saying, ‘Here’s a Marine veteran, he’s got to have PTSD, we’re not going to give this guy his weapons back, he’s going to shoot everyone up,’ ” Baker said. “Again, it’s based on perception.”

Read More: https://www.startribune.com/local/west/277286541.html?page=1&c=y


Similar Posts


  1. Even if the Marine Veteran had PTSD, that alone is not enough to take away his guns and violate his Second Amendment Rights. Just think how many cops have PTSD at the federal, state and local level – some are even former Combat Veterans – and some have seen some horrific events in the line of duty as both law enforcement officers and as troops. Do we consider stripping law enforcement officers of their guns when they go through something horrific? No, we actually assign them counseling immediately and then return them to duty, but we make sure that they have access to counseling without it affecting / harming their careers. Veterans and current military personnel don’t seem to enjoy the same luxury because of how the military system is neglectful of its troops and stigmatizes them for seeking assistance. I would say that the ones seeking assistance are far safer than the ones who do not seek assistance for help. Those are guys you need to watch our for.

    Good call here Judge… thank you for upholding the law and for ensuring that this Sheriff didn’t just try to enforce his own set of laws – as I am sure he is now reminded as a result of this case that he was elected to enforce the laws of the state and the U.S., not make them up as he sees fit. He should also be mindful of the fact that the reason he is a law enforcement officer and entitled to carry a weapon is because of the sacrifices the young Marine Veteran and the many other Veterans like him have made for this country. A simple interview with the Marine Veteran by the Sheriff would have settled this after the Sheriff spoke with the USCP Detective / Agent. May be this will also serve as a reminder for the Sheriff that he should not let Washington politics dictate law in his county or state.

  2. I am appalled, but not surprised, that there are Congressional staffers who are blowing off Veterans’ concerns about the VA. When the time comes to start a Congressional inquiry, be careful and shop around for a Senator or Representative to help you. It is possible the staffer you’re talking has become too cozy with the local VA, and is actually part of the problem. Don’t be afraid to move your inquiry to another office. I called the office of one of my Senators with concerns about my local VA hospital, and how this problem could affect other Veterans. The staffer knew one of the parties I was concerned about, and went so far as to describe this person as “awesome” in the course of offering all kinds of excuses for that VA bureaucrat’s poor performance. Sure enough, the VA’s answer was unresponsive. I tried to follow up, but the Senator’s staffer would not return calls or respond to a letter. I did not hesitate to contact my Representative’s office, and got much better results. The Senator in question is a Republican and a Veteran – I expected much better from his staff. You really need to judge the staffer you’re talking with as much as the Member of Congress that you are reaching out to.

  3. The Obama administration seems to have an abrasive relationship with returning veterans. AG Eric Holder openly stated that returning veterans “could” pose a domestic terrorism threat from acquired knowledge of EID VBIED’s.

    Most troubling is that the VA is labeling “SOME” vets who seek out treatment for PTSD or even simple depression/anxiety as prohibited individuals from firearm ownership. Accordingly, many vets are foregoing treatment rather than risk their 2nd Amendment rights

    1. My opinion is that the POTUS needs to be impeached after the midterms. He is incompetent to hold the office.

  4. All Veterans should read (be informed by): 1. Congressional Research Services / Statutory Presumptives by law clerk Nichols October 2010 ( for claims of being in Vietnam; for claims closely CONTIGUOUS Vietnam; and claims contiguous to operations in Vietnam of such places as Guam, the Philippines, and Panama (canal). > 2. The Nehmer Training Guide Policy (211A) February 2011 : court ordered strict instructions for DVA to process claims. VA compensates class council for all of it’s work on Nehmer claims. Do you get the picture: One should not have to get a lawyer or group of lawyers to enforce an already made Federal Court Order to make the DVA comply ? 3. The Declaration of Independence. 4. The Preamble (to the Constitution of The United States of America) ( ; ) 5. And, the entire Constitution of The United States of America.The Buffalo DVA could not find …of government sources including The Buffalo DVA intranet that of my service in Vietnam …exposed to herbicides (etc.). Yet, I found it of the information: January 2010 Compensation & Pension Bulletin Policy (211) that provides Information on Vietnam Naval Operations; And, The June 2010 Compensation & Pension Bulletin Policy (211): ADDITIONAL Information on Vietnam Naval Operations. The Buffalo DVA now refuses to follow the Nehmer Training Guide to rate many other issues and to pay retro compensation within 21 days of Buffalo DVA examiners “diagnosis” of ischemic heart disease to as early as 2000. The VA medical review / examination took place April 18, 2014 at Bath Hospital, Bath New York. Today is October 3, 2014. on and on and on and on and on. Such is “substantive evidence ” that sanctions should be brought against The Buffalo DVA : as indicated/inferred by the federal court order : Nehmer Training Guide Policy (211A) February 2011. It is my present understanding that my case file(s) are heading to The Board of Veterans Appeals (another delay / denial). Months ago, the operator of DVA 1-800 number told me that the average cycle time for an Appeal to be processed is 380 days ( not to include the prior 55 months of Buffalo DVA delays to denials). The June 2010 C & P) Bulletin includes itself as being part of January 2010 C & P Bulletin: The January 2010 C & P Bulletin Policy (211) clearly states: There is no reason for the DVA to hold the claims of anyone who served on the above vessels during the indicated time frames. The ESTUARY within Da Nang Harbor consists of the Cue De River and the Han River. The “anchorage” area is within “THE ESTUARY” ; surrounded by 3 shore lines; well sheltered from the open sea; well within the geographical territorial boundaries of Vietnam. Have your claims adjudicated / re-adjudicated by both CRS Statutory Presumptives (by law clerk Nichols) and Thye Nehmer Court Order: Nehmer Training Guide: VA compensates class counsel for all of it’s work on Nehmer Claims Note: DVA ATTN Nehmer Working Group (Policy 211A) 810 Vermont Ave. N.W. Washington DC Do you get the picture ?

    1. No. You could not have presented a more convoluted message if you tried. And what does it have to do with this Marine’s case anyway? (I ask almost rhetorically since I am certain a detailed reply will follow)

  5. This is just another example of officials seeking to restrict veterans rights. We’re already treated as second class citizens anyway by the government and society. What better way to diminish us than to take away our gun rights? I think when people go to thinking about veterans, they tend to remember the movie Rambo instead of thinking of us as the men and women who have fought to defend every Americans rights!

Comments are closed.