Second amendment supporters dealt a MAJOR blow…

[MindWars]

Second Amendment supporters dealt a MAJOR blow…
-------------------------------------------------


O screwball must have put some real tough screws into this one since he is the moron idiot who put this plan into action in the first place.
Nothing like making your Doctor the medical police and turning them into snitches. What else can you expect from a ---------d up liberal medical doctor and those dumb enough to answer the question which by all rights isn't that damn doctors freaking business to begin with.

 

[Preacher]

Second Amendment supporters dealt a MAJOR blow…
-------------------------------------------------


O screwball must have put some real tough screws into this one since he is the moron idiot who put this plan into action in the first place.
Nothing like making your Doctor the medical police and turning them into snitches. What else can you expect from a ---------d up liberal medical doctor and those dumb enough to answer the question which by all rights isn't that damn doctors freaking business to begin with.

And I have the right and will use the right to tell any doctor who asks about my 2nd amendment rights to go fuck themselves. Then I will find a new doctor. Doubtful I would have this issue we are a fairly rural area everyone carries or at least owns guns

 

[Borillar]

My Doctor like to hunt and shoot, so not a problem. I've never had a doctor who really wanted to get up in my personal business anyway. They're busy enough as it is.

 

[Anathema]

Asking me about gun ownership would be the LAST words any Doctor says to me.

 

[miketx]

Nope, ain't giving up nothing. Come get them.

 

[Ringel05]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

 

[Spare_change]

The doctor who asks becomes my ex-doctor.

But, then, short of mental illness, I can't imagine why they would care one way or the other.

 

[MindWars]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

That's how you see it.

 

[MindWars]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

A case from last year...........................


All doctors – not just psychiatrists – should screen adults for depression, according to a government task force, a recommendation which opens the door to backdoor gun control.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force said that health workers should ask patients questions to determine if they have symptoms of depression, even if the patients don’t initially bring them up.

“The USPSTF recommends screening in all adults regardless of risk factors,” the task force paper stated.

This sets a dangerous precedent in which primary care physicians – who are visited more frequently than psychologists – could diagnose patients with mental health issues, ultimately leading to the restriction of their Second Amendment rights.

Case in point, New York State Police confiscated a Navy veteran’s guns in 2014 after he received treatment for insomnia at a hospital due to anxiety.

The police used a mental health database enacted by N.Y.’s latest gun control law, the SAFE Act, to declare veteran Donald Montgomery, who is also a former detective, “mentally unfit” to own firearms due to his hospital visit.

“The Plaintiff [Montgomery] is a retired law enforcement officer with a distinguished career of more than 30 years, who retired with the rank of Detective Sergeant,” Montgomery’s lawsuit filed against the hospital stated. “The Plaintiff had a spotless record and was awarded the department’s Bravery Medal; [He] had been a Commanding Officer for 15 years.”

“At the time of his presentation at the Emergency Department of Eastern Long Island Hospital, the Plaintiff suffered from sleep deprivation, occasioned by his move from one location in the state to another, with his wife of many years, to live closer to their adult child and young grandchild.”

And despite the fact Montgomery checked himself into the ER, the hospital labeled him an “involuntary admission.”

“On or about May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff received a telephone call from an .............................

 

[Ringel05]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

That's how you see it.

That's not how I see it, it's what the judges specifically said. It was a 1st Amendment case, not a 2nd Amendment case

 

[Ringel05]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

A case from last year...........................


All doctors – not just psychiatrists – should screen adults for depression, according to a government task force, a recommendation which opens the door to backdoor gun control.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force said that health workers should ask patients questions to determine if they have symptoms of depression, even if the patients don’t initially bring them up.

“The USPSTF recommends screening in all adults regardless of risk factors,” the task force paper stated.

This sets a dangerous precedent in which primary care physicians – who are visited more frequently than psychologists – could diagnose patients with mental health issues, ultimately leading to the restriction of their Second Amendment rights.

Case in point, New York State Police confiscated a Navy veteran’s guns in 2014 after he received treatment for insomnia at a hospital due to anxiety.

The police used a mental health database enacted by N.Y.’s latest gun control law, the SAFE Act, to declare veteran Donald Montgomery, who is also a former detective, “mentally unfit” to own firearms due to his hospital visit.

“The Plaintiff [Montgomery] is a retired law enforcement officer with a distinguished career of more than 30 years, who retired with the rank of Detective Sergeant,” Montgomery’s lawsuit filed against the hospital stated. “The Plaintiff had a spotless record and was awarded the department’s Bravery Medal; [He] had been a Commanding Officer for 15 years.”

“At the time of his presentation at the Emergency Department of Eastern Long Island Hospital, the Plaintiff suffered from sleep deprivation, occasioned by his move from one location in the state to another, with his wife of many years, to live closer to their adult child and young grandchild.”

And despite the fact Montgomery checked himself into the ER, the hospital labeled him an “involuntary admission.”

“On or about May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff received a telephone call from an .............................

The SAFE Act needs to be challenged as unconstitutional.

 

[Ringel05]

The case was specifically pursued as a 1st Amendment issue which is why the court ruled the way it did, it has no direct impact on anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. If it can be shown that a specific physician used his/her patient confidentiality improperly then that is a completely different issue opening up said physician to potential legal consequences and law suits.

That's how you see it.

That's not how I see it, it's what the judges specifically said. It was a 1st Amendment case, not a 2nd Amendment case

And hopefully the guy in your article who was treated wrongly wins/won his law suit (another constitutionally guaranteed right) which starts the ball rolling on repealing that obviously unconstitutional law.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What a great way to get people to NOT seek treatment...

 

[Skull Pilot]

The Doctor can ask but you certainly do not have to answer

 

[Anathema]

What a great way to get people to NOT seek treatment...

One of the few things we will agree on.

 

[danielpalos]

Second Amendment supporters dealt a MAJOR blow…
-------------------------------------------------


O screwball must have put some real tough screws into this one since he is the moron idiot who put this plan into action in the first place.
Nothing like making your Doctor the medical police and turning them into snitches. What else can you expect from a ---------d up liberal medical doctor and those dumb enough to answer the question which by all rights isn't that damn doctors freaking business to begin with.

What Second Amendment protections?

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that doctors must be permitted to talk to their patients about guns, delivering a blow to gun-rights advocates who claim the doctor conversations threaten to infringe Second Amendment protections.