Showing posts with label Second Amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Second Amendment. Show all posts

Sunday, May 5, 2013

Gun Advocates Celebrate 'Secret' Obamacare Provision Forbidding Exec Order To Regulate Guns And Ammo

Harry_Reid_official_portrait_2009_crop1Forbes -  Cross-Posted at AskMarion: A shot heard ’round the blogosphere, Vice President Joe Biden’s suggestion that the administration might bypass Congressional participation to regulate guns in favor of using the executive order produced the inevitable choirs of “I told ya so” as Biden’s sound bite appeared to provide the proof that Obama was, indeed, coming for your guns.

But this time, the gun advocates were ready with more than just angry recriminations.

Acting with an assist from CNN, right-wing bloggers and gun advocates in the know, let loose with a tidbit of information they have, no doubt, been long chomping at the bit to unleash—the revelation that there is already a law on the books that would prevent the government from making good on Biden’s tantalizing suggestion, a law that would actually prevent the government from collecting data on firearm ownership and more.

And what might that law be?

Obamacare…

That’s right—it turns out that there is, indeed, a provision buried deep in the thousands of pages that is the Affordable Care Act entitled, “Protection of Second Amendment Rights”. You’ll find it in Section 2716 part c of the Affordable Care Act although, to save you the trouble, I have re-printed the provision below for your perusal.

Certainly, one strains to imagine how anything touching on gun ownership, the Second Amendment, etc. could find its way into a health care reform bill just as it confounds the imagination to contemplate who might have been responsible for adding such a clause in the first place. Obamacare is, after all, primarily the creation of a President who gun advocates have long believed is out to strip them of their firearms—not to mention a law written, supported and passed by those in Congress identified as coming from the “far left” of the political spectrum under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi.

So, how did such a strange provision find its way into health care reform?

You might be surprised to learn that the language was offered in a Senate amendment proposed by none other than Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid. While this news may come as a shock to those who view Reid as a leader of the left, politics will always trump ideology and—in the State of Nevada—politics dictates that running for office as a gun supporter is a way better idea than seeking office as a gun regulator. So, it should shock nobody that Senator Reid is a long-time gun rights advocate who has consistently counted upon the support of the NRA when running for election in his home state.

As for Reid’s reasons for burying a pro-gun measure into the body of the Affordable Care Act, the Majority Leader is said to have been concerned that the NRA planned to take an active position against the passage of Obamacare and decided, no doubt with the permission of Reid’s friend, NRA boss Wayne LaPierre, to head the problem off at the pass by putting language in the bill that would mollify the gun lobby.

Further, there was concern that a conspiracy theory then in circulation among right-wing circles—a meme suggesting that the Obama Administration had cleverly planted language in the ACA that could be used as a tool to get to the guns—would further erode public support for the legislation. For these reasons, Reid determined to insert some cozy language for the gun people into the Senate version of the ACA—language certain to escape public review at a time when the conversation was far more focused on hot button subjects like death panels, taxes and mandates.

For these reasons, the following language did, indeed, become a part of the nation’s controversial health care reform law:

(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 in- formation 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.

If you count yourself among those who object to any legislation or executive order that could limit or delay your ability to buy a flamethrower at the local gun show, this is certainly language that will put a smile on your face as this provision limits opportunities to collect and keep data on those who own firearms while creating some roadblocks when it comes to government’s ability to track whether or not you keep a weapon in your home, etc.

However, before you fire off a few rounds in celebration, you might want to take a good hard look at the actual draft of this section of the health care reform law because, unless you suspect that the President plans to put any newly proposed controls over firearms under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, I’m afraid you don’t really have much to celebrate.

The provision in question bars the HHS Secretary, anyone in the Secretary’s ‘chain of command’, and health professionals covered by this section of the ACA, from engaging in the collection of gun data through the ordinary course of the services they provide. By way of example, were someone to come into the emergency room for treatment of a nasty gunpowder burn, the attending physician would likely ask how the injury took place. When the injured answers by noting that something went wrong when firing his Bushmaster at the target range, this law prevents the physician, hospital or anyone else from feeding the information to a government data base and further prevents the HHS Department from collecting such data.

The law additionally prohibits the government from making the argument that, since guns can be deleterious to the health and wellness of people, it would be within the goals and objectives of the ACA to collect data on who has weapons in the effort to protect the health and wellness of of Americans. In other words, HHS cannot create a data base to collect info on guns under the theory that guns injure people’s health so they need to know where the guns are.

So, the good news for the gun folks is that the ACA is, indeed, prevented from being used as a weapon in the ‘War on Guns’ under the guise that guns are bad for people’s health. They can also take solace in the fact that the law prevents government from collecting any gun data resulting from information obtained in the course of medical providers doing their thing—much as HIPAA prevents such information from being used for a variety of purposes.

Beyond that, if you imagine that this obscure section of the Affordable Care Act is going to block the Administration from exercising whatever legal authority it may have to regulate guns in America, I’m afraid you will be quite disappointed.

I think all would agree that should the President resolve to use his executive powers to create a data base or any other regulatory provision, it is far more likely that such regulation would fall within the ambit of the Justice Department—not Health & Human Services—and nothing in the ACA prevents such data collection, or any other regulatory efforts, which would fall outside the limited jurisdiction created in Obamacare with respect to firearms.

So, to our friends at Breitbart and the others who believe they have discovered gold in their effort to prevent the administration from acting on its desire to bring sanity to our gun laws, I’m afraid you are going to have to reload as Obamacare is just not the magic bullet you are looking for.

Related:

What Piece of Seemingly Benign Advice From an NRA Speaker Has Liberal Sites Up in Arms?

Monday, July 16, 2012

Do you have a gun in your house? Your Doctor wants to know and so does the government.

Conscience of a Conservative - By: Nelson Abdullah – Oldironsides

When I got the following email message last week the first thought I had was how preposterous it sounded, until I read another article that follows it that confirmed it. The Federal government has required doctors to ask their patients if they have guns in their houses. Read it and become aware. The results of this informal survey sounds like defacto gun registration. Then, while having an office visit with my wife’s doctor, he casually asked me the same question and a chill went up my spine. He didn’t ask me if we had any knives or other sharp objects in the house, he asked me about guns, and he knows we don’t have any children living here.

Do you have a gun in your House?

When I had my gallbladder taken out and spent 10 days in the hospital for what should have been an overnight stay the insurance company kicked me out. I had home nurse visits for two weeks and was asked if I had guns in the house. I respond that if I did I would not tell them. So the below has some merit.

FYI, I am passing this along…there are comments from two other people I have also been asked if we keep guns in the house. The nurse just kinda slipped it in along with all the other regular questions. I told her I refused to answer because it was against the law to ask.

Everyone, whether you have guns or not, should give a neutral answer so they have no idea who does and who doesn’t. My doctor asked me if I had guns in my house and also if any were loaded. I, of course, answered yes to both questions. Then he asked why I kept a loaded gun close to my bed. I answered that my son, who is a certified gun instructor and also works for Homeland Security, advised me that an unloaded, locked up gun is no protection against criminal attack.

The Government now requires these questions be asked of people on Medicare, and probably everyone else.

Just passing this along for your information: I had to visit a doctor other than my regular doctor when my doctor was on vacation.. One of the questions on the form I had to fill out was: Do you have any guns in your house?? My answer was None of your damn business!!
So it is out there! It is either an insurance issue or government intervention. Either way, it is out there and the second the government gets into your medical records (as they want to under Obamacare) it will become a major issue and will ultimately result in lock and load!!

Please pass this on to all the other retired guys and gun owners…Thanks, from a Vietnam Vet and retired Police Officer: I had a doctors appointment at the local VA clinic yesterday and found out something very interesting that I would like to pass along. While going through triage before seeing the doctor, I was asked at the end of the exam, three questions:
1. Did I feel stressed? 2. Did I feel threatened? 3. Did I feel like doing harm to someone? The nurse then informed me, that if I had answered yes to any of the questions, I would have lost my concealed carry permit as it would have gone into my medical records and the VA would have reported it to Homeland Security.

Looks like they are going after the vets first. Other gun people like retired law enforcement will probably be next. Then when they go after the civilians, what argument will they have? Be forewarned and be aware. The Obama administration has gone on record as considering veterans and gun owners potential terrorists. Whether you are a gun owner, veteran or not, YOU‘VE BEEN WARNED !

If you know veterans and gun owners, please pass this on to them. Be very cautious about what you say and to whom.

And then I read this:

In a July 5 letter to Florida-based NRA members and friends, Marion P. Hammer, NRA Past President and current Unified Sportsmen of Florida Executive Director, wrote:

“…[on] June 29, in an order that reads like it was written by the Brady Campaign and the anti-gun lawyers of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Miami Judge Marcia Cooke struck down the so-called Docs & Glocks law, which would have protected Florida’s gun owner privacy rights.

“Judge Cooke’s order ridiculed the law, saying supporters of the law couldn’t provide anything but ‘anecdotal information’ to prove the law was needed to protect patients from discrimination. She said the state’s arguments in favor of the law rest on a ‘legislative illusion.’”

Hammer’s letter continued, “Be very careful, ANYTHING you say or tell your doctor in confidence may not be confidential at all anymore, if they enter it or has entered it into your medical records. Particularly, whether you have guns in the home and where they are stored.”

She said the Florida law, passed to stop doctors from interrogating children and their parents about gun ownership and guns in the home, and entering the information into medical records, is especially important now. Fears are escalating that government will have access to medical records that can become lists of gun owners, Hammer said.

She wrote, “If you doubt the government can access your medical records, ask yourself if you really believed the federal government could force you to buy health insurance.”

I checked Google for references to this subject and read one of those side-stepping “fact-checks” on Snopes that claimed that “Medicare has not required doctors to ask this question.” Well, technically speaking, if you limit your denial solely on the single point that Medicare doesn’t do it that does not mean that some other government agency such as the Dept. of Health and Welfare or some quasi-government group such as the American Medical Association hasn’t done the same thing.

Next thing you will know is that some bureaucrat will rule that guns are unhealthy to have in your home. And like those employers who want to know if you smoke at home and then cancel your health insurance if you tell them you do, the government will do the same thing. So besides having the government compile a list of which citizens admits to owning a gun, they will threaten to cancel your Medicare coverage or any other health insurance unless you agree to surrender your firearms.

My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Oldironsides