Mass doctors have right to discuss gun safety

The most troubling thing is that my doctor and I'm sure most of yours, as will they all soon, put everything in their medical database system. Who has access? The RMV so they can ticket me for not wearing a seatbelt? My insurance company so they can raise my premiums? Or Big Brother so they will know who has guns?

Just take my blood pressure and leave me the hell alone!
 
Say yes. Then when they go on the safety shpeal Id ask to see there certificate in firearm safety training [laugh]
 
Last edited:
At my last doc visit I asked to have a lead test done because I was concerned about all the indoor shooting I had been doing. We discussed the issue of lead, and lead only. He never once asked me about my guns, how they are stored, or anything else except my concerns regarding lead.

My lead level was somewhat elevated, so he recommended taking measures to mitigate my exposure, but never suggested that I stop shooting.

I say this just to point out that not all doctors will freak out at the mention of their patient having guns.
 
This is nonsense. The MA Medical Society has adopted a "policy". Big deal. It is not a federal, state or municipal law. You have no legal obligation to respond whatsoever. As a courtesy you may answer if you want, respectfully decline or even lie about it as you are not under oath.
i like my primary care doc and we go back 20-25 years but I would simply say to him, "It's a nonissue".
 
cosmo123 said:
This is nonsense. The MA Medical Society has adopted a "policy". Big deal. It is not a federal, state or municipal law. You have no legal obligation to respond whatsoever. As a courtesy you may answer if you want, respectfully decline or even lie about it as you are not under oath.
i like my primary care doc and we go back 20-25 years but I would simply say to him, "It's a nonissue".
Click to expand...
The issue is the medical establishment getting involved in a political debate and spreading propaganda.

That is always an "non-nonissue"...

Sort of like when the IRS gets involved in deciding whether your politics affect your equal protection under the law. It may have little near term impact, but it is a profound break-down of the principles and ethics of the institution which should cause massive review of the institution itself to cull the cancer that caused this...
 
cosmo123 said:
This is nonsense. The MA Medical Society has adopted a "policy". Big deal. It is not a federal, state or municipal law. You have no legal obligation to respond whatsoever. As a courtesy you may answer if you want, respectfully decline or even lie about it as you are not under oath.
i like my primary care doc and we go back 20-25 years but I would simply say to him, "It's a nonissue".
Click to expand...

You'd better not lie. Seriously.

Guy had his permit pulled in MA as being unsuitable for lying to his doctor. Essentially. Seriously.

If they make it a law that the info in your medical records be part of the permitting process, and that's not out of the question in this state.... applicant denied owning guns to question by his own doctor, evidence of evasiveness and secrecy. Renewal denied.

OK, not this week, but hey.
 
Quiet said:
You'd better not lie. Seriously.

Guy had his permit pulled in MA as being unsuitable for lying to his doctor. Essentially. Seriously.

If they make it a law that the info in your medical records be part of the permitting process, and that's not out of the question in this state.... applicant denied owning guns to question by his own doctor, evidence of evasiveness and secrecy. Renewal denied.

OK, not this week, but hey.
Click to expand...

What guy? references? Doctors are not part of the firearms process.
 
I'll try to find the link, but it's a pending in MA Supreme Judicial Court case.

The guy's non-resident permit was yanked because he informed his doctor's office staff that he was placing his own pistol into a case, they got moonbatty worried and called the cops (8 hours later) who came and investigated, and found that he had used a false name, figured out who he was, and the FRB yanked his permit.

Didn't you guys watch the video of the arguments?
 
WatchCityCPA said:
I'd guess Quiet is talking about FRB v. Simkin:

Mass Appellate Courts - Public Case Information

Where part of the state's case was the fact that Simkin used a pseudonym when visiting a doctor for privacy reasons.

I disagree with his opinion on the consequences of lying to a doctor, but IANAL.
Click to expand...

LOL I don't think we could possibly have a difference of opinion about consequences for rules and laws and situations that don't exist... Or maybe we could and do, but my head hurts trying to think that through right now. :D

I don't think it's the case NOW, but IF (and I don't think it's out of the question, sadly) they allow or require access to medical records for permitting whi has been discussed, and if the doctor remarks that you denied/refused to answer a question about firearms....

Either way, it's not in the top 100 of threats to our rights at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Considering there are about 900 times more deaths annually from medical malpractice than all gun violence combined, perhaps these doctors should stick to discussing the needed improvements in their own field or practice first.
 
Quiet said:
LOL I don't think we could possibly have a difference of opinion about consequences for rules and laws and situations that don't exist... Or maybe we could and do, but my head hurts trying to think that through right now. :D

I don't think it's the case NOW, but IF (and I don't think it's out of the question, sadly) they allow or require access to medical records for permitting whi has been discussed, and if the doctor remarks that you denied/refused to answer a question about firearms....

Either way, it's not in the top 100 of threats to our rights at the moment.
Click to expand...
Privacy/disclosure of medical records for this purpose most certainly should be high up on the list of concerns. This is a retroactive threat and a back-door means of disarming people without ever passing a law saying they can or will.

Medical records should be a sacred as a confessional. If they aren't individual AND public health suffer from the loss of trust and corresponding loss of communication.
 
cekim said:
Privacy/disclosure of medical records for this purpose most certainly should be high up on the list of concerns. This is a retroactive threat and a back-door means of disarming people without ever passing a law saying they can or will.

Medical records should be a sacred as a confessional. If they aren't individual AND public health suffer from the loss of trust and corresponding loss of communication.
Click to expand...
You're probably right about that.

Not something I've spent a lot of time thinking about with the exception of the stoopid HIPAA acknowledgements that always say at the end: "This policy may be changed at any time and such changes will apply retroactively to all data we have" which essentially means you are signing away all of your rights by signing that, and would probably have a tough time getting past that agreement if need be someday.

Anyway, it's what I thought of when I read this thread about physicians asking about guns and people lying about it.
 
Quiet said:
You'd better not lie. Seriously.

Guy had his permit pulled in MA as being unsuitable for lying to his doctor. Essentially. Seriously.

If they make it a law that the info in your medical records be part of the permitting process, and that's not out of the question in this state.... applicant denied owning guns to question by his own doctor, evidence of evasiveness and secrecy. Renewal denied.

OK, not this week, but hey.
Click to expand...


I'm calling it...[bs1]
 
I have not changed my mind...my answer is still a resounding NO!!! You guys need to find a personal physician, as a primary doctor, and stay away from the Minute Clinic.
 
My doctor has never asked me. My kids go in for their annual physicals (they are both teens, so I don't go in with them anymore) and during the car ride I instruct them to decline to answer the question. I also tell them if the doc is persistent they should tell her to find me in the lobby; after two years she never has come out to the lobby. Both kids say she just moves on to the next question without skipping a beat.
 

Similar threads

  • Locked
Ammo Shipping to Mass
Replies
25
Views
690
drgrant
drgrant
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
220
Coyote33
Coyote33
What not to do with your new gun.
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Coyote33
Coyote33
Does anyone have
2
Replies
30
Views
907
appraiser
appraiser
With gun violence on the ballot, Mass. Rep. Jake Auchincloss puts PAC to work
Replies
19
Views
927
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom