NRA fingerprints in landmark health-care law

Washington Post ^ | December 30, 2012 | Peter Wallsten and Tom Hamburger

[neverdem]

The words were tucked deep into the sprawling text of President Obama

[Darksheare]

“and discovered only in recent days by some lawmakers and medical groups”

LOL, “Pass it to find out what’s in it” bites them in the butt?

[Mouton]

I guess you have to pass the law to read what is in it. I think that is what we were told, so GFY Wapo.

[technically right]

We gotta pass it so that we can see what’s in the bill.

Heh, heh, heh.

[neverdem]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nra-fingerprints-in-landmark-health-care-law/2012/12/30/e6018656-5066-11e2-950a-7863a013264b_print.html

The URL got lost. I never saw that before.

[Darksheare]

At least it didn’t do a browser barf and double post on you.
Let sidebar know you have the link and that it seems to have vaped on you for some reason.
That is, if sidebar still lives?

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

“Pass it to find out what’s in it”

Just like a stool sample!

[Neidermeyer]

P 766 of 906 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf

I’ll have a copy of this in my hand when my 7 year old goes for his next checkup..

‘‘(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS.—
‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.—A wellness
and health promotion activity implemented under subsection
(a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any
information relating to—
‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully-possessed
firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property
of an individual; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm
or ammunition by an individual.
‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the
authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that
Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the
collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm
or ammunition;
‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATA BANKS.—None of
the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made
by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used
to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of
a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PREMIUM RATES OR
ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.—A premium rate may not
be increased, health insurance coverage may not be denied,
and a discount, rebate, or reward offered for participation in
a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld under
any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or in accordance
with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an
amendment made by that Act on the basis of, or on reliance
upon—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm
or ammunition; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR
INDIVIDUALS.—No individual shall be required to disclose any
information under any data collection activity authorized under
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment
made by that Act relating to—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm
or ammunition; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm
or ammunition.’’.
(f) Section 2718 of the Public Health Service Act, as added
by section 1001(5), is amended to read as follows:

[Darksheare]

Or a bladder stone?

[Washi]

Good.

It's a minor victory against a monstrosity of a health care law; kind of like flipping the bird at the tiger right before it eats you, but a victory is a victory.

If all medical records are to be accessible by the government, and they are, then doctors asking about and documenting gun ownership is tantamount to registration.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

INCONVENIENT FACT: Countries that allow private gun ownership have much lower overall murder, suicide and violent crime rates than countries with pervasive gun control laws.

EVIDENCE: According to no less an authority than the peer-reviewed Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, countries with stringent gun control laws have higher murder and suicide rates than those without.

DOCUMENTATION: “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence by Don B. Kates and Gary Mauser, Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, pages 649-694. (To download a PDF copy of the journal article, simply Google the title. It is available on the web free of charge.)

QUOTE: “If you are surprised by our findings, so are we. We did not begin this research with any intent to “exonerate” handguns, but there it is — a negative finding, to be sure, but a negative finding is nevertheless a positive contribution. It directs us where not to aim public health resources.”

INDIRECTION: The trick hoplophobes always use is to say that America has higher gun-murder rates than other countries, but a lot of those “murders” are criminals killed in the act of committing violent crimes. Compare absolute murder rates, and the result is “more guns, less murder.” (Source: GunFacts.info);

SECOND INCONVENIENT FACT: According to DOJ crime statistics, guns are used by US citizens 2.5 million times per year to prevent violent crimes like rape, robbery, home-invasion and carjacking, 99% of the time without a shot being fired. (Source: GunFacts.info)

THIRD INCONVENIENT FACT: “Assault weapons” (AKA semiautomatic rifles) are used in less than 1% of gun crimes. (Source: GunFacts.info)

QUESTION: If gun-free zones make people safe, then why don’t we declare the immediate vicinity of the President and Vice-President to be gun-free zones and send the Secret Service home? Or are gun-free zones good enough for our kids, but not good enough for our overlords?

METAPHOR: America has more private gun ownership than most other countries, so naturally there are more gun murders. America also has more hospitals than most other countries, so naturally we have more people dying in hospitals. Does that mean we should outlaw hospitals?

[moovova]

Well, I guess my doctor could waterboard me to find out...

[onona]

I’m wavering, see, my doc is retired Marine, still learning to use the system.

What if I told him I own 15 AR’s, 6 Springfield Arms M1’s, 4 Ruger’s, 8 shotguns of various manufactures, etc.

I know he wouldn’t give a crap, but, where would that get me ?

[Resolute Conservative]

It is none of his business. I have known my doctor for over 15 years and I don’t tell him anything that is not applicable to my visit.

Just like it is non of the business of the cashier at a store to ask me my zip code or some other drivel if I am paying with cash (shoot even a debit card).

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks neverdem.

Under the headline "Protection of Second Amendment Gun Rights" was a brief provision restricting the ability of doctors to gather data about their patients' gun use -- a largely overlooked but significant challenge to a movement in American medicine to treat firearms as a matter of public health.

Any doctor who'd try that with me would have his face sued off, and if that failed, I'd go back and throttle his or her miserable ass with their sphygmomanometer. I mean that figuratively of course.

[zeestephen]

Re: ObamaCare

Read an essay about this several weeks ago.

Your “FREE” annual ObamaCare exam includes dozens of personal questions like seat belt use, condom use, etc.

We require 7 years of specialized medical training for General Practitioners, but all you'll get is the same conversation you had with your parents when you were a teenager!

It gets worse...

At your annual “FREE” exam, there is a precise script the GP must follow.

If you have a specific medical issue you are worried about, the GP cannot advise you or treat you at THAT exam.

You must make a NEW appointment for that.

The Catch 22...

You can't make a NEW appointment until AFTER you have your completely useless annual exam!

[cherokee1]

This conversation actually began quite some years ago. First govamint wanted to require doctors to ask children what/how/many/what kind of guns their folks had in the house. They were itching to declare “guns-in-the-home” a safety issue for children, pretty much a back door way to get EPA involved in another fake, firearms related, safety issue. NRA did indeed get active to make sure that didn’t happen but the basic problem even preceded Obamuzzie and his not-so-health-care law.

[moovova]

“... but, where would that get me ?”

Probably get your an offer from your Doc to purchase a couple of your weapons...

And, seeing as how you may want to be on GREAT terms with your Doc when the SHTF, you’ll probably do him right...maybe even throw in some complimentary ammo.

[Peet]

If all medical records are to be accessible by the government, and they are, then doctors asking about and documenting gun ownership is tantamount to registration.

True.

I would add "accessible by the government and any hacker who breaks in to any of the multitude of access points".

I spend decades in the computer business from before there was an internet and I tell you this: There is no secure system/database. Anyone who tells you otherwise is p*ssing up your leg and telling you it is rain.

[Peet]

Just like it is non of the business of the cashier at a store to ask me my zip code ...

That question is about where they direct advertising circulars (read “junk mail”).