The measure, when it takes effect, will require health professionals to inform state authorities about patients who display violent, suicidal or threatening behavior. Right now, such information is reported to state officials only on people who have been institutionalized, not on those who receive only outpatient treatment.
So much for doctor/patient confidentiality. The state has inserted itself into your most private affairs, thanks to our wonderful representatives and those who aid and abet them.
What this means, of course, is those who have suffered an extreme loss and don't know how to cope with it are on their own. Lose a beloved spouse or a parent? Feeling depressed, maybe violently angry at a drunk driver who ran over your child? Been brought down to your knees and grasping for something, anything to help you go on, make sense of things, stop the unendurable heartache?
Well congratulations. If you sought professional help, you just went in and confessed to a deputized agent of the state, and forfeited your right to keep and bear arms not only now, during your time of greatest pain and confusion, but probably forever after. And since there doesn't appear to be a limitation on access to only that information specifically related to the new law's criteria, all kinds of other deepest darkest most private secrets may now be subject to state scrutiny and probing.
I'm waiting for the first person victimized by this to file a test case against self-incrimination. At the very least, with this new edict should come a requirement for mental health professionals to read all patients a Miranda warning before begining treatment.
We are all slammed into the ground at times in life. When the bell tolls for you, seek out a trusted friend, family member, minister. Unfortunately, when that is not enough, your choices will be to forego treatment or lie to your therapist--that is, if you wish to keep your guns after the storm has done its worst.
7 comments:
It has nothing to do with protecting the public. It has nothing to do with keeping weapons out of the hands of dangerous individuals. This is 100% a ploy to make owning a firearm impossible while incrementally implementing a police state.
How many doctors will simply report you as dangerous (since it doesn't affect them) rather than risk getting sued because they didn't spot the one person who actually went nuts?
I've said it before, I'll say it again. This world is full of evil and crazy and no amount of Big Brother will make that go away.
HA! HAHAHA! You're funny David.
You forget that we had an attempted "snitch" program, in case some of those "waskly tewwowists" were living next door to you. If you think for one minute that under Hellerycare that kind of thing, that is snitching on people won't be encouraged or mandated you're just fooling yourself. Also, don't overlook all the "security" technology being worked on, video surveillance systems that study the way you walk, or talk, or God knows what, AND have facial recognition (even if unreliable it's better to put all the possible matches into the ineligible persons list)...
So, you see the only people who will retain their rights will be the criminals, and they will be criminals only BECAUSE they retain their rights.
but, but David, don't you remember all the pragmatists telling us how much we got with 2640? How something like this could never happen and if it did, it can be corrected by appealing to the people who did it? Don't you remember?
I do, and those pragmatists are on my list of people not to rely upon or respect, because when it comes time that something must be done they will find one more pragmatic reason not participate, but rather kneel and lick the iron fist.
Assuming that troubled people have a family member or friend to talk to this might be a good thing that they avoid shrinks.
Their family member or friend isn't going to prescribe a dangerous psychotropic mind-altering drug.
I know I won't ever go to one of those people again.
I predict a link between pharmacists and NICS. Prescribed paxil? Get on the list, lose your rights.
Insurance companies first. It's easier to get that data, fewer databases. Long term, yeah probably pharmacies will end up included.
So, does anyone know if they actually funded the mechanism to get removed from NICS? Since we were told that there would be a way to get people off the list.
At least we finally find out how many guns comprise an arsenal. According to this AP story, 4 guns equals an arsenal. I was wondering.
D'you suppose writing "boundary violation" on the part of the pediatrician's questionnaire referring to gun ownership will trigger a report?
Post a Comment