doctors cannot ask about guns

[StSapphire]

It's a different process for each state.

In our state (SC):

(As of October, 2006)

Rifles and Shotguns

* Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No.
* Registration of rifles and shotguns? No.
* Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No.
* Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No.

Handguns

* Permit to purchase handgun? No.
* Registration of handguns? No.
* Licensing of owners of handguns? No.
* Permit to carry handguns? Yes.

Gun Laws by State


Then, there is Jiro's NJ:

(As of February, 2006)

Rifles and Shotguns

* Permit to Purchase - ID Card Required
* Registration of Firearms - No
* Licensing of Owners - Yes
* Permit to Carry - ID Card Required Yes

Handguns

* Permit to Purchase - Yes
* Registration of Firearms - No*
* Licensing of Owners - Yes
* Permit to Carry - Yes

* Police record of all transfers required.

(List here is not inclusive of all the restrictions for NJ; go to website for the rest.)

Note: NJ gun info was four pages long, and the SC gun info was two pages.

Fair enough.

So, the situation is now this:

Jiro already legally owns, say, a hunting rifle, and he's told his doctor as a result of being asked during a routine checkup of his child, while his doctor is ensuring that he knows how to keep his gun locked up/unloaded like a good gun owner should. He makes a note in Jiro's child's record saying "there's a gun in the house, check every few years to make sure it's being kept safely" or something along those lines.

A year or two later, Jiro wants to register for a concealed-carry license and purchase a handgun. As part of the process, he has to get some sort of psychological evaluation, to ensure that he's not crazy. In the process, it somehow comes to light that he already owns a hunting rifle, by reading his kids' files illegally or whatever. The licensing bureau uses this information to deny him a license.

1) The last two sentences in that scenario, in and of themselves, seems highly unlikely. If "knowledge that he already owns a firearm" is going to come out, the psychologist isn't going to need to read his child's history to find that out, he'll just ask Jiro about it, which makes that "mark in my file" irrelevant.

2) I'm pretty sure if the people who hand out licenses merely use "you already own another firearm" as a reason to deny licensing, then the issue isn't with "how they found out" (which seems to be the concern here), but that their licensing process isn't working.

 

[StSapphire]

Yeah a pamphlet from an inquisative Dr would have saved them. :roll:

Haha, I think that's kinda the point entirely. A pamphlet probably wouldn't have. A doctor taking an interest in their life and reminding them/teaching them of gun safety around children possibly could have.

 

[Banjo]

Haha, I think that's kinda the point entirely. A pamphlet probably wouldn't have. A doctor taking an interest in their life and reminding them/teaching them of gun safety around children possibly could have.

I think it's a shame that people have to interpret it as if it was a political agenda created by rabid bleeding heart anti-gun liberals, at least that's what some would say, for instance, Ann Coulter. The doctors' priority is the health and safety of their patients.

 

[TXgolfer]

Haha, I think that's kinda the point entirely. A pamphlet probably wouldn't have. A doctor taking an interest in their life and reminding them/teaching them of gun safety around children possibly could have.

Yeah, because that works so well with smokers and the fattys. Not to mention people who smoke fattys.

 

[Daredevel7]

Well, I don't even know what's the point of asking if they are gun owners.

Those who don't own a gun will simply say "Oh no I dont even own one."

Those who do are going to clench on to their beloved (their guns, not their kid) and respond negatively. *cough* Jiro *cough*

Gun owners are notoriously defensive about their guns. *cough* Jiro *cough* Do you honestly think MOST gun owners will respond this way:

Doc: "Do you have a gun?"
Parent: "Yes I do. Several actually."
Doc: "Okay, I just wanted to let you know about gun safety... *5 min lecture about gun safety"
Parent: "Gee, I never thought of it that way. Thank you very much, doctor! You may just have saved my child's life!"

*Parent drives away from hospital with more confidence in his parental duties, gets into an accident, and realizes that his child was killed because he forgot to make sure he had his seat belt on.* (Okay Okay, I just HAD to add an irony twist. I love 'em)

 

[StSapphire]

I think it's a shame that people have to interpret it as if it was a political agenda created by rabid bleeding heart anti-gun liberals, at least that's what some would say, for instance, Ann Coulter. The doctors' priority is the health and safety of their patients.

Well, all that's needed is one case of a doctor informing a parent that maybe it would be better for their child if they didn't keep a firearm in their house (for any reason whatsoever, even something as simple as the parent saying offhandedly "Oh yeah, I can be a bit forgetful and leave all sorts of stuff laying around at home" or "No, I can't afford a lock box to keep my gun in when I'm not using it"), and it's instantly interpreted as "THEY'RE TRYING TO STEAL OUR GUNS!"

 

[Reba]

I agree. There are people who are pretty lax with gun safety. Here's a good example....

Very sad examples.

I don't know why some parents are so careless about gun safety with children in the home. Laziness? Carelessness?

All new guns come with gun locks and safety instructions. Gun stores give away free gun locks for those who need them.

 

[Jiro]

A doctor isn't going to somehow prevent you from owning a gun. I fail to see how there's a constitutionality issue with the situations whatsoever. In regards to the seat belt thing... honestly, I don't know, because I'm not a doctor. I could make uneducated guesses, but they'd honestly probably sound silly. The reasons for asking about gun ownership presented in this thread (ie to inform those who might not already know about gun safety around small children) seem entirely reasonable to me.

I have to renew my firearm license every few years. I have to apply every time I want to buy another handgun. Police Chief can deny those.

 

[Daredevel7]

Very sad examples.

I don't know why some parents are so careless about gun safety with children in the home. Laziness? Carelessness?

All new guns come with gun locks and safety instructions. Gun stores give away free gun locks for those who need them.

A bit off topic but... what is the purpose of a gun lock when people use guns for security?

One of my friends always keeps a gun loaded ready to be used in case someone breaks into her place.

I would think a locked gun would be pointless if someone breaks in. "Hold on a minute, let me just unlock this gun first so that I can threaten you... now where are the darn keys...."

Not trying to mock guns or anything. It's a serious question.

 

[Jiro]

Except you've been advocating against conversation entirely.

no. I am against ASKING part and a mark in the record.

 

[Jiro]

A bit off topic but... what is the purpose of a gun lock when people use guns for security?

One of my friends always keeps a gun loaded ready to be used in case someone breaks into her place.

I would think a locked gun would be pointless if someone breaks in. "Hold on a minute, let me just unlock this gun first so that I can threaten you... now where are the darn keys...."

Not trying to mock guns or anything. It's a serious question.

1. gun lock is for child safety reason
2. it's a felony if child had an access to firearm
3. gun lock is not always unlocked by a key. there's a gun safe that can be unlocked quickly within 2 seconds.

 

[StSapphire]

Very sad examples.

I don't know why some parents are so careless about gun safety with children in the home. Laziness? Carelessness?

All new guns come with gun locks and safety instructions. Gun stores give away free gun locks for those who need them.

I could think of a few reasons, but basically, yeah, it comes down to irresponsibility in the form of laziness, carelessness, etc.

I have to renew my firearm license every few years. I have to apply every time I want to buy another handgun. Police Chief can deny those.

Okay. My original point still stands. If "owning a gun" is somehow counted against you, then the issue is with the license renewal process, not with how they found out about it.

no. I am against ASKING part and a mark in the record.

Why? The "mark in your record" would literally only be "so-and-so owns a gun". You have to register it anyways, and the registration records are far more easily accessible to the police and other governmental authorities. If you're simply worried about other people knowing you own a firearm (which is weird in and of itself - the few people I've known who had concealed carry licenses were proud of that fact, rather than secretive and paranoid), then don't tell them.

 

[Reba]

The proposed situation as to why they might ask is if you're the parent of a child, and the doctor merely wants to ensure that you're aware of gun safety with a child in your home. That situation seems entirely reasonable to me.

The parents who own guns know about gun safety. Not all of them practice what they know (hence, the accidental shootings). How to make them apply their knowledge?

Children whose parents don't have guns can still be exposed to guns when they visit the homes of other people, or go out in public. It's not just the gun-owning parents who have to be gun safety conscious. How's the doctor going to cover those situations by lecturing only the gun-owning parents?

 

[Jiro]

let me correct you there -

Fair enough.

So, the situation is now this:

Jiro already legally owns, say, a hunting rifle, and he's told his doctor as a result of being asked during a routine checkup of his child, while his doctor is ensuring that he knows how to keep his gun locked up/unloaded like a good gun owner should. He makes a note in Jiro's child's record saying "there's a gun in the house, check every few years to make sure it's being kept safely" or something along those lines.

more like - "Jiro has 2 years old child at home with gun." and probably additional information such as his medical opinion or observation on my state of mind or whatsoever.

A year or two later, Jiro wants to register for a concealed-carry license and purchase a handgun. As part of the process, he has to get some sort of psychological evaluation, to ensure that he's not crazy. In the process, it somehow comes to light that he already owns a hunting rifle, by reading his kids' files illegally or whatever. The licensing bureau uses this information to deny him a license.

I signed the consent form allowing NJ State Police and town police captain an access to my medical record. Police Captain may or may not see a mark on my medical file that I have 2 years child at home and doctor's additional note. He would deny me of my gun rights as out of concern for my child, thinking that 1 gun is more than enough for me.

1) The last two sentences in that scenario, in and of themselves, seems highly unlikely. If "knowledge that he already owns a firearm" is going to come out, the psychologist isn't going to need to read his child's history to find that out, he'll just ask Jiro about it, which makes that "mark in my file" irrelevant.

A mark in my child's file will raise a concern for certain people and it's more than enough for police captain to deny me of gun rights. That's how it is in NJ-NY. Right now, I'm considering a lawsuit against my town police captain because he had incredibly lame reason to delay a licensing process to issue me another handgun permit. My friend had to resort to this and he lives just a several towns away. What a sad state this is. I've been waiting close to 3 months and that is unacceptably too long. I'll give it another week or so to hear his response to my courtesy letter.

2) I'm pretty sure if the people who hand out licenses merely use "you already own another firearm" as a reason to deny licensing, then the issue isn't with "how they found out" (which seems to be the concern here), but that their licensing process isn't working.

bingo. their licensing process isn't working. their scheme isn't working. It's, in fact, illegal and unconstitutional. It's just a matter of time till massive lawsuit will land on them. It is predicted that lawsuit will come to NJ after Maryland.

Gun rights advocate group especially NRA want to keep NJ-NY last because these states are the most difficult and the most corrupted states in USA. It's best to target "easy" states just to build up enough ammunition to tackle NJ-NY.

 

[Reba]

I wonder why guns are so much more dangerous now that they have trigger locks, safes, vaults, etc., compared to the days of rural America when the family rifle was easily accessible over the mantel or by the front door, with no locks on them?

I think about Sgt. York and his family and neighbors. All the boys started shooting at a young age, and even though they weren't wearing bright orange in the woods, there didn't seem to be epidemics of shooting casualties.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for safety features and practices. I just wonder why it seems to take twice as much precaution now to get half as much result.

 

[Jiro]

Okay. My original point still stands. If "owning a gun" is somehow counted against you, then the issue is with the license renewal process, not with how they found out about it.

Why? The "mark in your record" would literally only be "so-and-so owns a gun". You have to register it anyways, and the registration records are far more easily accessible to the police and other governmental authorities. If you're simply worried about other people knowing you own a firearm (which is weird in and of itself - the few people I've known who had concealed carry licenses were proud of that fact, rather than secretive and paranoid), then don't tell them.

and it's also possible that my medical insurance will jack up the premium for that reason... forcing me to give up guns. It's NJ-NY's sleezy way to get around it.

Example - It's unconstitutional for state to ban a certain type of ammunition but my state does not like hollow-point bullet. Their Solution? they made it illegal to bring hollow-point bullets out of the house unless you're going to range but that interpretation is extremely tricky and narrow.

 

[Reba]

I have to renew my firearm license every few years. I have to apply every time I want to buy another handgun. Police Chief can deny those.

Too much discretion left in the hands of the police chief. Heaven help the person who applies to the chief when he's having a bad day, or he just doesn't like your looks.

 

[Jiro]

Too much discretion left in the hands of the police chief. Heaven help the person who applies to the chief when he's having a bad day, or he just doesn't like your looks.

Couple weeks ago, he denied me of additional permit simply because he didn't like the relay call with me - a verbal confirmation as part of background check. He complained that he does not like this because he does not know who is he talking to.

So I wrote him a courtesy letter, reminding him that he is the one who issued me a firearm license so why give me trouble on another background check? He ALREADY did a background on me in the first place. :roll: let's see what happens next. I don't really want to resort to lawsuit because I don't want to brew up bad blood between us especially in my town and I certainly don't want to cough up legal fees.

 

[Reba]

and it's also possible that my medical insurance will jack up the premium for that reason... forcing me to give up guns. It's NJ-NY's sleezy way to get around it.

Example - It's unconstitutional for state to ban a certain type of ammunition but my state does not like hollow-point bullet. Their Solution? they made it illegal to bring hollow-point bullets out of the house unless you're going to range but that interpretation is extremely tricky and narrow.

Yes, there are always tricky loopholes for them to get around that Second Amendment thing.

They've discovered that the amendment protects arms but not ammo. Ah...let's make it expensive and hard to get.

 

[Jiro]

Yes, there are always tricky loopholes for them to get around that Second Amendment thing.

They've discovered that the amendment protects arms but not ammo. Ah...let's make it expensive and hard to get.

exactly why I support "Tell Us, Not Ask Us" Policy. I can see how both parties can easily agree to it.

Why give them more reason to make it unnecessarily harder for us law-abiding citizens? This state doesn't make sense. They made it nearly impossibly hard for us to own a gun and yet... they made it easier for people to get away from DUI? :roll: