Wanna discuss firearms with your doc?

[BehindBlueI's]

I am actually with you (mostly) on this.
But, when every doc asks you this, what are you going to do?

I've never been asked. Well, my dentist when I lived in Scottsburg did ask once when he saw I was carrying. He then said he carried a .410 derringer so we had a little chat about getting a real gun, but otherwise I've never been asked. I've worn my gun to the doctor, to physical therapy, to the dentist, I've used the lock box when getting an MRI...and it's not once come up outside of the dentist thing.

If every doc asked me, I'd say "yes". I'm a cop. I've got an (expired) LTCH. My credit card receipts are full of Brownells, Midwest, SNS casting, Rocky Mountain Reloading, etc. I'm an NRA member. I've written politicians on gun related legislation. I'm probably wearing one or more when they ask me. I post on gun forums. It's not a secret I've got guns. If they then ask if they are safety stored, again I'll say "yes" because they are. I'm not any more offended by the question than when the ask me if I drink, smoke, or use narcotics, etc.

If I didn't want to answer, I'd just say so. We're all adults. I refuse to give my phone number to cashiers at retail stores, but I don't need a state law to prohibit them from asking me.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I am actually with you (mostly) on this.
But, when every doc asks you this, what are you going to do?

I might or might not lie. I won't advise anyone to do so, but you asked and (granted, you didn't ask *me*, but...) I'm answering.

...If I didn't want to answer, I'd just say so.

As was referenced upthread, BBI, any answer other than "no, I don't have guns" will be taken by the gun grabber as a "yes".

We're all adults.

Would that TPTB treated us as such.

I refuse to give my phone number to cashiers at retail stores, but I don't need a state law to prohibit them from asking me.

The retail cashier has not the power to affect your life; if they charge you too much, you can choose to walk out of the store without the items you wanted to purchase, without penalty. If, provided it is not repealed, Obamacare requires all MDs to report how many of their patients do not answer "no" to the gun question, and then those numbers are used to generate stricter laws we are expected to follow, the stakes are a bit higher. FWIW, though, I've been known to give the local number for time and temperature as my phone number. I also might or might not have reported my number as "867-5309", despite my name not being "Jenny"

[video=youtube;F8L2cI8brzQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8L2cI8brzQ[/video]

or Peggy.

Me, I don't favor a law restricting speech. I would be in favor of a law prohibiting the collection and/or reporting of data on patient ownership of guns, however, absent an EDO from a judge.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Ask the doctor his certification in gun safety and/or operation.

And, ask what guns have to do with what you are there for?

Followed by, are you also going to get grilled on dangerous chemicals, blunt objects, sharp objects, first aid kits, and fire extinguishers.

The one time I've been asked about guns in the house the list wasn't exactly the same as yours. I think they asked about cleaning supplies/chemicals, medicines, smoke detectors, firearms, and maybe a few more. Gave me a standard flier on safe storage on the above. Well placement recommendations on the smoke detectors. I think the recommendations for firearms were store firearms and ammo separately in a locked container.

 

[jamil]

As was referenced upthread, BBI, any answer other than "no, I don't have guns" will be taken by the gun grabber as a "yes".

How do you know? Maybe things aren't as malignant as we think. Maybe there aren't really all that many anti-gun zealots, even as physicians. It's my understanding that the firearms question is on the suggested list by HHS. It's not mandatory. I've never had a doctor ask me that question. My doctor is an old ****er who hates computers. As it is he spends a lot more time entering stuff in the computer than he does examining me. I even offered to help once because he was taking so long. I suspect he doesn't ask any more questions than his medical group requires because it's just more crap he has to enter. But then I'd bet many doctors likely just follow the .gov recommendations.

But here's the point. I don't think the default belief should be that doctors are like closet government agents trying to secretly document who has guns. I think they mostly just want to do their jobs. The default on those forms is no answer at all. It's assumed that it's 'no' unless you say 'yes'. Maybe there are some anti-gun zealots, but even then, why would they make up a 'yes' just because you didn't want to answer the question? If anything, I think they might press you on the issue, but to make up an answer, to me doesn't seem as likely. And if he/she presses the issue, if you want, just tell them to mark 'no'.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I tell my doctor...someone grabs my guns. Walk me through that.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I don't think that docs are gov't agents. I think they want their reimbursement. It's less of an issue with Obamacare on the way out, but price of liberty/eternal vigilance and all, y'know? As to your thing about default answers, I know only the triage screen I have to fill out on every patient. Unless certain data points are collected, it discards all info as if nothing had been collected. There is no default answer. Further, if I "make something up", they call that falsifying medical information, and it's one of those things that the state board of nursing frowns upon. On the alcohol question, I've missed documenting it a couple of times, usually because I ticked the box and the mouse double-clicked, removing my checkmark. Result: I get told a couple days later, "Hey, you need to fix that chart."

Do the individual docs care who owns guns? For the most part, probably not. Do the gov't bureaucrats who send the checks out care? That's another issue entirely. Had Obamacare come to full fruition and the .gov been the only one paying medical bills... you give consent to share your chart and everything in it with payors for the purpose of getting your claims paid. It's not such a big leap that since gov't owns those records now, they would share them with FBI and others.



Blessings,
Bill

How do you know? Maybe things aren't as malignant as we think. Maybe there aren't really all that many anti-gun zealots, even as physicians. It's my understanding that the firearms question is on the suggested list by HHS. It's not mandatory. I've never had a doctor ask me that question. My doctor is an old ****er who hates computers. As it is he spends a lot more time entering stuff in the computer than he does examining me. I even offered to help once because he was taking so long. I suspect he doesn't ask any more questions than his medical group requires because it's just more crap he has to enter. But then I'd bet many doctors likely just follow the .gov recommendations.

But here's the point. I don't think the default belief should be that doctors are like closet government agents trying to secretly document who has guns. I think they mostly just want to do their jobs. The default on those forms is no answer at all. It's assumed that it's 'no' unless you say 'yes'. Maybe there are some anti-gun zealots, but even then, why would they make up a 'yes' just because you didn't want to answer the question? If anything, I think they might press you on the issue, but to make up an answer, to me doesn't seem as likely. And if he/she presses the issue, if you want, just tell them to mark 'no'.

 

[gregr]

I don't think that docs are gov't agents. I think they want their reimbursement. It's less of an issue with Obamacare on the way out, but price of liberty/eternal vigilance and all, y'know? As to your thing about default answers, I know only the triage screen I have to fill out on every patient. Unless certain data points are collected, it discards all info as if nothing had been collected. There is no default answer. Further, if I "make something up", they call that falsifying medical information, and it's one of those things that the state board of nursing frowns upon. On the alcohol question, I've missed documenting it a couple of times, usually because I ticked the box and the mouse double-clicked, removing my checkmark. Result: I get told a couple days later, "Hey, you need to fix that chart."

Do the individual docs care who owns guns? For the most part, probably not. Do the gov't bureaucrats who send the checks out care? That's another issue entirely. Had Obamacare come to full fruition and the .gov been the only one paying medical bills... you give consent to share your chart and everything in it with payors for the purpose of getting your claims paid. It's not such a big leap that since gov't owns those records now, they would share them with FBI and others.



Blessings,
Bill

Yup, exactly. Those who don`t see the issue are troubling to me, but so long as they only jeopardize themselves and their rights, then good for them for being so trusting and open and all...the intrusion by your medical doctor into your gun business is not benign.

 

[Cameramonkey]

BoR nailed it. Its not them we are actually worried about. They arent going to call the ATF or scold us. They are "just doing their jobs" filling out the forms they are mandated to complete. The problem is upstream.

Its the same issue we have with electronic 4473s, UBCs/registration, etc. The creation of the list/adding names to the list in and of itself is not a big deal per se in today's climate. Its what is done with the list later on that is the problem. Since we cant guarantee that future laws/govts wont be "tyrannical", (aka Red Dawn, Australian style bans, etc) we have to strive to avoid the existence of any collection of such data today under a benign govt.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Odd. People keep telling me how ineffective the Australian gun ban was and how few guns were actually turned in. I suppose they should have had their doctors ask about guns before hand. There's also a pretty significant list of better ways to accomplish anything nefarious right here in this thread.

And, so far, not a single person has admitted to being for a state law limiting what doctors can ask patients, unless I missed someone...

 

[Sylvain]

I don't know if it's 100% related to the topic of that thread but in France you need a note from your doctor in order to own a gun.
To join a shooting club, own a gun or get a hunting licence, you need a medical certificate mentioning that your state of mental and physical health is compatible with the use of firearms.
I can see how, in the US, your doctor asking about firearms could be a slippery slope that could lead to a system similar to the one in France.Where your doctor can keep you from having access to guns.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Odd. People keep telling me how ineffective the Australian gun ban was and how few guns were actually turned in. I suppose they should have had their doctors ask about guns before hand. There's also a pretty significant list of better ways to accomplish anything nefarious right here in this thread.

And, so far, not a single person has admitted to being for a state law limiting what doctors can ask patients, unless I missed someone...

I've used this example before and it almost never fails to generate unnecessary indignance. Bear with me.
I can't think of a reason I would favor a law limiting anyone in their capacity as a citizen in their natural rights. If that person is an agent of gov't, such as a LEO, I favor limits on that person in that capacity. The LEO, legislator, executive, judge, or other government employee has no rights as such, but does have powers and authority. The person on that position has the reverse: rights, but no power or authority. If the doctor is a government employee, then in that capacity, I would favor a law such as is under discussion, BBI. If s/he is a private citizen, without power over another, I would not.

So, what I'm saying is that the citizen who is a government employee must choose which s/he is for the purpose of the conversation. S/he may choose to have power and authority OR rights, but not both.

Is that convoluted enough? :-)

Blessings,
Bill

 

[jamil]

Odd. People keep telling me how ineffective the Australian gun ban was and how few guns were actually turned in. I suppose they should have had their doctors ask about guns before hand. There's also a pretty significant list of better ways to accomplish anything nefarious right here in this thread.

And, so far, not a single person has admitted to being for a state law limiting what doctors can ask patients, unless I missed someone...

I would prefer government stay out of healthcare altogether. They should neither tell doctors what to ask nor prohibit them from asking anything. As a consumer, if you don't like what questions your doctor asks, find another if it bothers you that much.

 

[jamil]

I've used this example before and it almost never fails to generate unnecessary indignance. Bear with me.
I can't think of a reason I would favor a law limiting anyone in their capacity as a citizen in their natural rights. If that person is an agent of gov't, such as a LEO, I favor limits on that person in that capacity. The LEO, legislator, executive, judge, or other government employee has no rights as such, but does have powers and authority. The person on that position has the reverse: rights, but no power or authority. If the doctor is a government employee, then in that capacity, I would favor a law such as is under discussion, BBI. If s/he is a private citizen, without power over another, I would not.

So, what I'm saying is that the citizen who is a government employee must choose which s/he is for the purpose of the conversation. S/he may choose to have power and authority OR rights, but not both.

Is that convoluted enough? :-)

Blessings,
Bill

We're not single-payer yet. My dr isn't a government employee yet. When that happens the answer will be, "guns? No. I don't have no guns." Which is technically true. If I have one gun, then I don't have "no" guns.

 

[indiucky]

I don't want to but every time I go to see him he has a half dozen questions about them or is seeking my opinion on his latest purchase....

"I know you're not working now but what do you think is the best 1911 for about $1000? Oh and cough please...."

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I don't want to but every time I go to see him he has a half dozen questions about them or is seeking my opinion on his latest purchase....

"I know you're not working now but what do you think is the best 1911 for about $1000? Oh and cough please...."

Indiucky's guns are the first to be grabbed. Then they'll have to call him to see how to unload a cap and ball revolver.

 

[indiucky]

Indiucky's guns are the first to be grabbed. Then they'll have to call him to see how to unload a cap and ball revolver.

Cap and ball???? Pshaw dude....I'm a flintlock man...

 

[1DOWN4UP]

11th Circuit partly Reverses Ruling on Doctors, Records, and Guns