RE: firing your doctor over questions they ask.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmckay2

people are way too paranoid

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerrymrc

Yes and no. Here is why. All medical records are now electronic and accessible by my employer. Once everything is in place it will be real easy to cross them into a query to pull that info. I will leave it at that.

---

Ask Californians OR Ny'er (SAFE Act) It's allowed in NY to confiscate firearms IF a LE or person in the medical field BELIEVES you may be or pose a threat to other people.

While i do support removing people who show or present a danger to them self or others, from dangerous items.

My question / CONCERN is . With the medical profession , AMA etc, in favor of stricter gun laws. How does one prevent an over zealous person from reporting you?
The safe act is so vague, it bases confiscation upon said persons Perception of one with a gun.

My neighbor is a cop. We're in a rural area so shooting guns is ok, even the cop does it. One day you ask him (again) to keep his dogs off your property, or you'll contact animal control. Next thing you know mister casual neighbor feels as a gun owner, you possess a threat to the gen pop.
I don't believe it's a far fetched scenario and one that can, could happen anywhere. [TIN FOIL HAT OFF]

2013 article

California is the only U.S. state where law enforcement officials confiscate guns from the homes of individuals not legally permitted to own them. The program, which takes guns away from criminals and the mentally ill, is being heralded as a model for the nation.

Individuals who legally purchased guns but are now disqualified are identified by analysts who match gun sales back to 1996 with databases listing criminal convictions, restraining orders and mental health detentions, UPI reports. Over the past five years, agents conducting twice-weekly sweeps have confiscated more than 10,000 guns.
However, there are still more than 19,700 individuals on the state's Armed Prohibited Persons list, and it would cost the state up to $50 million to hire more agents to catch up with the backlog, according to Attorney General Kamala Harris

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...bear-arms.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...s-confiscated/

Such was recently the case for one woman, who had been in the hospital voluntarily for mental illness last year that she says was due to medication she was taking. Lynette Phillips of Upland, Calif., told TheBlaze in a phone interview Monday she had purchased a gun years ago for her husband, David, as a present. That gun, as well as two others registered to her law-abiding husband (who does not have a history of felonies or mental illness), were seized last Tuesday.
“My husband is upset that they took the right from us that should never have been taken, Phillips told TheBlaze.
But according to the state of California, that doesn’t matter.
“The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm” regardless of who the registered owner is, Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office


http://www.omh.ny.gov/omhweb/safe_act/

http://www.governor.ny.gov/nysafeact/mental-health-faq

The NY SAFE Act is designed to remove firearms from those who seek to do harm to themselves or others. This means keeping the minority of individuals with serious mental illness who may be dangerous away from access to firearms. This law should not dissuade any individual from seeking mental health services they need. [ROFL3]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerrymrc

Yes and no. Here is why. All medical records are now electronic and accessible by my employer. Once everything is in place it will be real easy to cross them into a query to pull that info. I will leave it at that.

---

its a standard question to try to weed out mentally ill patients who also have guns. if you schizophrenic patient says yes to that question, its worth looking into. don't have mental illness? say no you don't have any guns. you aren't required by law to answer that question truthfully. the atf isn't going to come to your house and check if you were honest. they are hoping people with mental illness will accidentally disclose that they do in fact have guns, in which case intervention might be required. i have the government as much as everyone else, but this isn't a conspiracy to take everyone's guns. its a minor step taken to try to take guns from mentally incompetent people so mass shootings don't occur. don't like the question, just answer no. its simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmckay2

its a standard question to try to weed out mentally ill patients who also have guns. if you schizophrenic patient says yes to that question, its worth looking into. don't have mental illness? say no you don't have any guns. you aren't required by law to answer that question truthfully. the atf isn't going to come to your house and check if you were honest. they are hoping people with mental illness will accidentally disclose that they do in fact have guns, in which case intervention might be required. i have the government as much as everyone else, but this isn't a conspiracy to take everyone's guns. its a minor step taken to try to take guns from mentally incompetent people so mass shootings don't occur. don't like the question, just answer no. its simple.

---

The flip side is no medical folks are reporting over Hipa disclosure .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

What do you bet, a few years down the road, their will be "studies" and "MSM news" that reports that in scientific studies countrywide, only 1.5% of households own guns, a dramatic decrease in the last decade - PROOF THAT AMERICA HATES GUNS AND POLITICIANS NEED TO IGNORE THE 2A!

Source: Surveys taken of fathers in pediatric offices between May and August 2018. Scientifically verified by the office of health care and money wasting, under the executive office of Hillary Clinton. Further audited by the reanimated frankenstein, high priestess Diana Feinstien. Numbers reflect a margin of error of +/- 100%. Some figures may have been estimated by medical doctors, taken from measurements of the rectum of respective patients. All hanging chads were counted as "No gunz". Non-english speakers, or those speaking southern accents, or those speaking west virginian, who could not be understood, were assumed to have no guns. Those refusing to answer were assumed to refuse to answer because they were scared people would find out they have no guns and would attack them. Therefore, these counted as "no" answers.

---

Well played Sir, well played!! [Beer]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

What do you bet, a few years down the road, their will be "studies" and "MSM news" that reports that in scientific studies countrywide, only 1.5% of households own guns, a dramatic decrease in the last decade - PROOF THAT AMERICA HATES GUNS AND POLITICIANS NEED TO IGNORE THE 2A!

Source: Surveys taken of fathers in pediatric offices between May and August 2018. Scientifically verified by the office of health care and money wasting, under the executive office of Hillary Clinton. Further audited by the reanimated frankenstein, high priestess Diana Feinstien. Numbers reflect a margin of error of +/- 100%. Some figures may have been estimated by medical doctors, taken from measurements of the rectum of respective patients. All hanging chads were counted as "No gunz". Non-english speakers, or those speaking southern accents, or those speaking west virginian, who could not be understood, were assumed to have no guns. Those refusing to answer were assumed to refuse to answer because they were scared people would find out they have no guns and would attack them. Therefore, these counted as "no" answers.

---

By 2018 i'll forgot what i did in , 2018 ;)

I think the world is supposed to end by 2020, so no worries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kidicarus13

As good as it may make you feel to tell them "None of your f'n business!" a far better answer would be similar to Rays'. A simple NO does not attract suspicion while a "none of your business" indicates guns are probably present.

This may seem like splitting hairs in 2014 but could potentially have greater implications in the future if firearm ownership starts to become less acceptable. My $.02

---

It depends on what the OP wants to do. Lying on the form gets them off your back but they'll keep asking those questions and (mis)using the answers. Knowing they have lost business over the question ... may lead them to stop asking the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerrymrc

I can look at your hearing test and tell if you are a shooter and if your right or left handed unless your hearing is totally gone. [Flower]

---

We-e-e-ell ... I get what you are saying about imbalanced effects (and how that shows the damage is from shooting rather than riding motorcycles, working as a blacksmith, etc.) bu-u-u-ut ... my last hearing test (2 months ago) was on the high side of normal and balanced so you might have a little bit of difficulty picking mine out from a crowd of non-shooters ... [Coffee]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmckay2

people are way too paranoid

---

Let's see, we have definitive proof that people in the IRS were misusing tax information, misusing official powers for partisan political purposes, and doing things they didn't actually have official powers to do. We know Obamacare placed medical records and enforcement of healthcare in the sterling (!?!) hands of the IRS. It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerrymrc

Yes and no. Here is why. All medical records are now electronic and accessible by my employer. Once everything is in place it will be real easy to cross them into a query to pull that info. I will leave it at that.

---

... and again, I repeat myself ... the IRS has already taken illicit steps to cross-reference databases and provide confidential tax information to agencies and organizations with no need or authorization for it.

As it is right now, lying to your doctor about your firearm ownership is not a crime. But once government is fully in control of our healthcare (and they're 90% there now) it will be.

IIRC Lying on ANY government form is considered a crime (often, if not always, a felony).

Better to fight this now when it's just an annoyance and get laws in place like the one in Florida that was just held up by the courts to FORBID doctors from asking you and/or your minor children ANY questions about firearms ownership.

A better answer is to say "that is a boundary violation" that will shut them up quick.