It seems that specific circumstances are happening more and more lately, which usually are the result of one person's opinion. Now, you're putting words in my mouth. I am not insinuating anything. I am stating facts, of which I have some personal observance to.....you can argue till the sun shines, and put words in other's mouths if you wish. All any physician has to do, is raise a red flag...that's all it takes, period.
See post 19...again....
No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--
(C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority
HR-2640 Section 3. (c)(1) IN GENERAL- No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--
(A) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, has been set aside or expunged, or the person has otherwise been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring;
(B) the person has been found by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that was the basis of the adjudication or commitment, respectively, or has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated through any procedure available under law; or
(C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, except that nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall prevent a Federal department or agency from providing to the Attorney General any record demonstrating that a person was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Yeah, I've seen all that, again.............
And, yet you see only what you want to see.
Can you cite a case where firearms were taken ONLY on the basis of a prescription?.... or a case where firearms were taken ONLY as the result of one physician's statement?Quote:
If it is deemed by whomever, that a medication that you are prescribed is not " compatible with firearm ownership" guess who's going to come knocking for your firearms. It's happening already.
What I do, is go by personal observations......I don't need to site anything.....it's like when the gov't comes out with unemployment numbers...then you ask them...did they take into account, the people who have just given up...well, no.........you can serve up all the numbers and statistics that you want...we all know, that 10 people studying the same problem, will come up with 10 different conclusions, and 10 different numbers......I have a VA hospital within 2 miles of me, and they have had their issues for years, well documented in my area....you seem to think, that everyone abides by every rule, every law, every set of procedures, every moral compass.........I'll end this conversation with......I have some really nice dry land I can sell you, it's by the Everglades, but it's really dry, honest.........and it's cheap. Your wrong in the fact that I see alot of things that I don't want to see.
I have some really nice dry land I can sell you, it's by the Everglades, but it's really dry, honest.........and it's cheap
... and the ethics of physicians is called into question....? Wow.... :smt1099
from a physician standpoint that doc was being a weirdo
there is no law or medical rule saying owning a handgun has anything to do with your health
yes i have read about studies linking owning handguns to increasing the risk of an unintentional discharge and someone getting hurt. kind of like smoking increases your risk of cancer doesnt mean it will happen.
so to be clear it was just that doc there is no conspiracy or rule by the medical establishment to log who owns a gun and theres no tracking at this time and i don't ask my patients this question nor was I ever told or taught to do so. frankly i have more pressing questions to ask during my 15 min office visit
now i will tell you about a real medical conspiracy as an insider sorry for going off topic but come 2014 good luck trying to see your doc because the health care reform act kicks in saying everyone is required by law to have health insurance which sure doesnt affect you except you forgot that 30 million people that were not insured now suddenly are by the govt and so talk about wait times to see your doc...socialized medicine ppl
swfan, that question is now standard in some places. Inform yourself please. What happens in your county and state isn't necessarily what happens in the rest of the country.
Just my two cents!!!!!!!!!!!!