Will they use the Medical reason of "gun violence epidemic" to enact gun control laws


PDA






usmarine0352_2005
January 17, 2013, 02:28 PM
.

Is the medical angle what the Obama administration is planning on using? He involved the CDC. He could also have the Surgeon General make moves. Could it be their back-up plan or even more main plan? (I'm not just saying the CDC, but the medical field in a whole and attempt to make "gun violence" a medical problem rather than a societal problem.)



Can they say that the gun violence epidemic needs to be curbed and attempt to take away 2nd Amendment rights that way?
.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will they use the Medical reason of "gun violence epidemic" to enact gun control laws" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JustinJ
January 17, 2013, 02:31 PM
No. The CDC had been tracking fatality and injury statistics before any of this ever happened.

rcmodel
January 17, 2013, 02:41 PM
Yes.

Giving the CDC the power & 10 million dollars to include small arms in its research of disease and related "public health crisis"?

The CDC has already tried to outlaw lead in bullets and shot some time ago.
If they were to do that again?

None of us could afford to shoot any longer.

Then again, they just did a study 10 years ago under Bush with astounding results.
I guess the current gun-ban politicians didn't listen to them the first time.
http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm


The President of the United States appoints the director of the CDC, and the appointment does not require Senate confirmation. The director serves at the pleasure of the President and may be fired at any time.

Mr. Obama appointed the current director, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden in 2009.

Dr. Frieden served as health adviser to New York City Mayor Bloomberg before being appointed CDC director by Obama.

As one of mayor Bloombergs former henchmen, where do you suppose he stands on gun control?
And do you suppose this new CDC study under Obama will come to a different conclusion then the old CDC study under Bush?

You betcha it will!

rc

harrygunner
January 17, 2013, 03:31 PM
The CDC attempts to position guns as a public health concern. I've read where their results actually do the opposite.

A Chicago newspaper published: "The Centers for Disease Control, an agency of the federal government, has conducted studies of many of the gun-control laws in place, such as waiting periods, registration, and bans on certain types of firearms. The results showed that the idea that gun control laws have reduced violent crime is simply a myth." http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/letters/14160460-474/cdc-exposes-gun-control-myths.html

But, the president's recent executive action list included a request for a backdoor in HIPAA patient privacy for the government. He asked for access to patient records that does not require justification based on statistical evidence.

Obamacare includes billions of tax payer dollars to subsidize physicians who buy electronic medical record software (EMR). Encouraging a move toward digital formatted data probably should stay in the private sector. But, along with the good, an EMR also makes it much easier to share patient data with the government.

The government also mandated a move toward ICD10 diagnosis codes this year. An ICD code is an alphanumeric code associated with an assessment of a patient's issue. The government receives these codes as part of the Medicare billing process.

There are about four times as many ICD10 codes as the previous ICD9 set. Included is a "Mental and behavior disorders" subsection of codes (Subsection F).

Gone are the days when you could talk to a family physician about anxiety, stress, sexual issues in private. Now, codes are sent to the government if Medicare or Medicaid might pay for treatment. In addition to what one usually associates with mental illness, these plus alcohol, sedative, inhalant or cannabis use; fear of spiders, culture shock and plenty more are all under Section F. There are at least three other sections about "handgun" or "firearm" being involved with injuries.

Throw in the "clerk mentality" of a lot of government workers, and one can easily be tagged as someone falling into the "mental disorders" category.

One must be careful talking to a physician. Simple expressions of concerns could lead to loss of basic rights. This further break in trust between patient and physician comes from our bigger, more intrusive government.

Dr. Sandman
January 17, 2013, 04:06 PM
One must be careful talking to a physician.

Make that talking to the WRONG physician. There are PLENTY of pro-gun physicians out there.


These are from the Fox News page

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.


20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover


21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health

These EO are just a bunch of fluff and window dressing. Doctors have always had the duty of reporting patients that are planning violent acts, and this is a good thing. Only 16 and 17 mention health care providers and don't do anything new.

Loc n Load
January 17, 2013, 05:37 PM
The CDC was defunded from studying gun violence in the 90's because they had an anti gun agenda. They were going to conclude that guns were a "public health hazard" just as they did with cigarettes. They made no secret about that. That is why the Republicans cut millions of dollars of funding to ZERO. This another " backdoor" approach to banning or taxing out of existence our guns. Tell your representatives not to support funding the CDC in studying gun violence.

Vern Humphrey
January 17, 2013, 05:39 PM
But, the president's recent executive action list included a request for a backdoor in HIPAA patient privacy for the government. He asked for access to patient records that does not require justification based on statistical evidence.
Which lays the groundwork for painting enemies of the regime as "mentally unstable."

Teachu2
January 17, 2013, 05:42 PM
No - but they WILL TRY....

beatledog7
January 17, 2013, 06:49 PM
Public health concerns are nearly always region=specific to some degree. What's causing issues in Oregon might not be such a big deal in Florida, for example, and vice versa.

If guns are a public health crisis it's only in major cities where they are banned or very tightly controlled. But sadly, a Federal solution always over reaches and punishes the mostly good for the sins of the very few bad.

Vern Humphrey
January 17, 2013, 07:23 PM
Those who think making guns a "health care issue" is something we can ignore need only look at Obamacare. Who would have thought that selling your house would be a health care issue, and carry a 3% tax?

Leanwolf
January 17, 2013, 07:42 PM
VERN HUMPHREY - "Which lays the groundwork for painting enemies of the regime as "mentally unstable."

Yes.

People should be aware that under Stalin and his successors, any person who disagreed with anything about communism or the Soviet State, was automatically considered "mentally unstable." That was what the infamous Soviet show trials were all about. Guilty, guilty, guilty.

The "mentally unstable" either ended up in the horrid gulags of Siberia ... or with a bullet in the back of the head.

Some here will say, "Oh no. That could never happen here. Not in the land of Jefferson."

I recall the sophisticated woman in Germany, who, after WW II, was asked, "How could all this have occurred?"

She answered, "We never thought it could happen here. Not in the land of Beethoven."

Same here as our highest politicians on the liberal progressive Left, 99% of the media, most academicians, etc., continuously disparage, denigrate, and demonize gunowners and the NRA, as "dirty, dangerous, crazy, filthy vermin." Their brainwashing is incessant. They have a "Final Solution" for us gunowners.

If anyone doesn't believe that, he'd better understand their eventual Goal and what they'll do to acheive it.

L.W.

SaxonPig
January 17, 2013, 07:52 PM
"They" will use any means.

All this talk about keeping people with mental issues from buying guns... how about they declare all NRA members mentally unstable? Bingo.

EBK
January 17, 2013, 07:58 PM
Dear Mr Obama; MOLON LABE!

chipcom
January 17, 2013, 08:04 PM
of course those who want to disarm citizens will attempt to use any means they think they can get away with to do it.

Semper fi

alsaqr
January 17, 2013, 08:04 PM
The CDC was defunded from studying gun violence in the 90's because they had an anti gun agenda. They were going to conclude that guns were a "public health hazard" just as they did with cigarettes. They made no secret about that. That is why the Republicans cut millions of dollars of funding to ZERO.

This!!!

The CDC became politicized on the gun issue many years ago. After a debunked CDC funded "study" came to light the US congress acted. Now the media and the anti-gun medical establishment have resurrected that phoney study.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPrint.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1321

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/14/blackout-how-the-nra-suppressed-gun-violence-research/

phillipduran
January 17, 2013, 08:07 PM
Yes, just like smoking and cigarettes.

Because there is a cost to people being shot and the government is now an interested party in your health care, they will try to meddle in your firearms and ammo even more for the sake of paying for the health care "caused" by guns. Ammo taxes, gun taxes etc.

Who needs to pass laws when you have taxes that can do the work for you?

harrygunner
January 17, 2013, 09:13 PM
There are PLENTY of pro-gun physicians out there.

Here's hoping they can stand against the economic incentives the government has in place. Medicare reimbursements will be reduced if the physician does not bill from an EMR. And diagnoses must be truthful, else face Medicare fraud.

The only way out for the patient and a pro-gun physician is private pay. Paying with private insurance or "out of pocket" bypasses the need to send data to the feds/state.

Cesiumsponge
January 17, 2013, 09:21 PM
The medical angle will only give a lopsided approach. That's why the NCIP at the CDC was defunded from doing firearms research.

You can chart all the gun deaths and injuries you want, and divide them up by how many times they were shot or what caliber bullet, but that doesn't give you data that can be used to establish gun policy (though it might put an end to '9mm vs 45ACP' type discussions).

The CDC isn't in the business of tallying how many people didn't die because guns were involved, or how many heart attacks were avoided. It doesn't say how many lives were saved from avoiding fast food or how many lives were saved from using a firearm in self-defense. Even if the CDC was 100% unbiased instead of blatantly anti-gun, the research doesn't actually accomplish anything useful in the public realm.

22-rimfire
January 17, 2013, 10:32 PM
Facts are not required for the passage of right limiting firearm regulations and controls.

DHJenkins
January 17, 2013, 10:36 PM
Short answer: no, don't be foolish.

Long answer: too long to post.

barnbwt
January 18, 2013, 12:03 AM
Giving the CDC the power & 10 million dollars to include small arms in its research of disease and related "public health crisis"?

[QUOTE]No. The CDC had been tracking fatality and injury statistics before any of this ever happened.
I was under the impression that the CDC (funded or defunded to research violence and guns) was legally barred from advocating one way or the other with regards to gun policy (I'm thinking H W Bush passed this, for some reason? :confused:). It should just generate yet more questionable statistics data from the government (hell, we don't even trust the jobs figures or inflation rate, anymore). It's not like we aren't up against bogus/ancient stats misrepresented by the anti's every day already--nothing new to worry about.

Mr. Obama appointed the current director, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden in 2009.

Dr. Frieden served as health adviser to New York City Mayor Bloomberg before being appointed CDC director by Obama.
Had I heard about this ~6 months ago--I'd have been (slightly) more inclined to believe the (then) paranoid delusions of people predicting an imminent drum mag ban. Glad I didn't, since I held on to 'em :D

TCB

1911 guy
January 18, 2013, 12:10 AM
Whether they do it or not remains to be seen. What is evident, however, is that they (administration specifically and government in general) will do anything they think has a reasonable chance is flying. Which means yes, they will try.

XD 45acp
January 18, 2013, 12:14 AM
" Aw, sorry Jim, due to your medical condition, I have to report that you have a gun.... but look at the bright side, you won't care because I am prescribing you medicinal Marijuana"

velojym
January 18, 2013, 12:18 AM
Can't waste a perfectly good emergency, even if you have to create it yourself.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will they use the Medical reason of "gun violence epidemic" to enact gun control laws" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!