BLACKHAWKNJ
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,126
I would have said "Yes! Let me tell you about my 14" Naval Gun. It came from the USS New York. Loading it is a great workout!"
She doesn't have to ask the first question, go right to the second. "If you have a gun in your house, is it kept where the kids can't get to it?" Or even, "Do you keep your guns locked up when your not using them? Have you taught your kids about gun safety?"
"Do you have guns?" is still inappropriate.
I see what you did there.I'd rather a doctor ask me about guns than do the old gloved finger routine. The bottom line is...
My family doctor's office suddenly instituted a "standard" questionnaire with all kinds of personal questions, including gun ownership.
I did not answer the questions. When I got to see the doc, after the exam was done, I told him that the questionnaire was inappropriate and intrusive.
Then I changed doctors.
My new doc does not engage in anything that is not related to the business at hand, and I have been with him for almost five years. If that changes, I will go doc-shopping again.
My wife asks the question and AFAIK it's not recorded anywhere. The record is something like a checkbox that they covered X, where X is an inclusive term for "wear seatbelts, wear bicycle helmets, knives are dangerous, smoking around kids increases their risk for asthma," and so on.Some are missing the point. The premise is wrong. Outside of the affliction at hand, gun ownership is a question that is included in a "profile" of the patient. Assessing risk factors related to guns is like your health insurance company finding out that you hang in 2nd hand smoke filled bars on a regular basis. They see an increased risk and charge you more for your coverage or drop you cuz you is a high risk for cancer.
It ain't being paranoid if it's true.
it is being "interpreted" by your gov as a disqualifier to own a firearm.
It means that PTSD - post traumatic stress disorder - is being seen as a "mental illness" as it applies to gun ownership. Which is a disqualifier.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h110-2640
ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE
A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
Is a danger to himself or to others; or
Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.
The term shall include—
A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a, 876b.
COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION
This term means a formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term also includes a commitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness, and commitments for other reasons such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or any voluntary admission to a mental institution.
No, no, no.
"Mental illness" is not a disqualifier. Being adjudicated as mentally defective or being committed to a mental institution is what disqualifies you.
A HUGE difference.
From 27 C.F.R. § 478.11
Any large mistreated or mis-trained dog is just as dangerous.espicially a pit bull