Doctors can report some mentally ill patients to FBI under new gun control rule

The Obama Administration has entered a new rule in the Federal Register.

It apparently amends some old rule(s) that concern HIPAA privacy.

Now it seems a doctor can report some "mental illnesses" and those reports will be on the FBI firearms background check system used in gun background checks !!

Their turning up the heat on the boiling water for all of us frogs.

Obama.Care II is here


Doctors can report some mentally ill patients to FBI under new gun control rule


federalregister.gov/2015-33181

Delivering on its promise to deliver "common sense" gun control, the Obama administration on Monday finalized a rule that enables health care providers to report the names of mentally ill patients to an FBI firearms background check system.

The action was one of a series of steps that President Barack Obama had called for in January 2013 in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., shootings to curb gun violence, but the rule was not published until today.

While the 1993 Brady law prohibits gun ownership by individuals who have been involuntarily committed, found incompetent to stand trial or otherwise deemed by a court to be a danger to themselves or others, federal health care privacy rules prohibited doctors and other providers from sharing information without the consent of their patients.

Well What's NEXT?

a reply to: xuenchen

And thanks to the ACA, the federal government already has everybody's medical records.

a reply to: xuenchen

So, what I have seen over the years in this whole gun control scenario is that a lot of pro gun people or gun owners argue that it's not the guns that need controlled it's mentally ill people who need to be looked closely at. Here we have a step in that very direction, and people are still complaining?

Of course, if you actually read the article instead of a somewhat selective quote:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: greencmp

And thanks to the ACA, the federal government already has everybody's medical records.

No.

a reply to: Phage

Okey doke there buddy, if you can't see how these totalitarian policies could be misused, you are in the minority.

I am interested to hear how they couldn't be though.

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."

-Frédéric Bastiat

a reply to: greencmp
First, the ACA did not give the government access to everybody's medical records.

Second, an executive order does not carry much legal weight and is also subject to judicial review.

Political writer Tom Murse says: "[Most] executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress."

www.npr.org...

So all he is really doing is kicking Congress in the ass to do something. Anything.

But one thing is certain, every gun dealer in the country is saying "Yay!"

a reply to: xuenchen

Doctors can report some mentally ill patients to FBI under new gun control rule

I think the gang members who murdered over 3000 people last year in Chicago, Baltimore, L.A., Philly, New Orleans and Memphis are mentally ill. Why doesn't Obama and the DOJ go after them?

What defines mentally ill and whose to decide?

a reply to: onequestion
Read the article. The whole article. Not just the part X expects you to read.

a reply to: Phage

Whether through the ARRA, ACA or some other mechanism, the data is collected in electronic form.

What makes you think it wouldn't be accessed?

Of course, that's just potential state abuse. Criminals organizations and foreign governments could also have access to it.

Please put your skepticism to good use, I know you're good at it and you could be part of the solution.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Phage

Whether through the ARRA, ACA or some other mechanism, the data is collected in electronic form.

What makes you think it wouldn't be accessed?

Of course, that's just potential state abuse. Criminals organizations and foreign governments also have it.

You are grasping at straws here.

In theory, anyone can have access to your records, if they want them bad enough they will get them.
But if you're in good standing with the law, don't show any sort of extreme mental illness, why would 'they' go looking through your medical records?

a reply to: greencmp

Please put your skepticism to good use, I know you're good at it.

You may be confusing skepticism with paranoia.

a reply to: Phage

You sound like a true believer, which is a more logically defensible position?

"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?"

-Frédéric Bastiat

a reply to: greencmp

You think that I think the government can do no wrong? You are wrong.

But understanding that the government can screw up does not mean that it can't do anything right.

In any case, an executive action carries little weight and again, is subject to judicial review.

Old News..Nothing to see here

a reply to: Phage

The Federal Registry entry is where the meat is.

a reply to: xuenchen
Yes. It is. Maybe you should read it.

originally posted by: ColeYounger

I think the gang members who murdered over 3000 people last year in Chicago, Baltimore, L.A., Philly, New Orleans and Memphis are mentally ill. Why doesn't Obama and the DOJ go after them?

Wait till Obama "announces" his master plan later this year.

Nobody will believe it when it happens.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: greencmp

You think that I think the government can do no wrong? You are wrong.

But understanding that the government can screw up does not mean that it can't do anything right.

In any case, an executive action carries little weight and again, is subject to judicial review.

I actually don't think you think that which is why I am being a little provocative.

Limiting how much damage it can do seems to me to be of paramount importance.