Is a vote for health care reform a vote against gun rights?

September 3, 1:15 PMCharlotte Gun Rights ExaminerPaul Valone

Previous Next

3 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

The implications of "Obamacare" reach beyond socialized medicine
to the article which underpins the Bill of Rights -- The Second
Amendment. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

Gun Owners of America (GOA) has been alone on the national stage in warning of the dangers of centralized health care to the rights of gun owners. The NRA, by contrast, has been largely silent on the issue and has even defended passage of legislation (H.R. 2640) which began the process of centralizing mental health records – centralization which health care legislation could eventually build upon to create vast numbers of people prohibited from owning firearms.

H.R. 2640: THE BUILDING BLOCK

Passed after the Virginia Tech tragedy, H.R. 2640, the “NICS Improvement Act of 2007,” requires states to expand the list of “prohibited persons” reported to the FBI for inclusion in background checks conducted under the National Instant Check System (NICS) created by the Brady Act. Specifically, it requires submission of “mental defectives” (their words, not mine), to deny such persons the ability to buy firearms.

While the NRA was technically correct in arguing H.R. 2640 did not expand the list of prohibited persons, existing vague language in United States Code could already be construed to prohibit tens of thousands of people from owning guns, including (but not limited to) diagnoses of depression, bipolar disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), chemical dependency, and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Moreover, those “adjudicated” as “mental defectives” might never have the benefit of a day in court. By creating a centralized reporting system, H.R. 2640 paved the way for centralized healthcare to dramatically increase the number of people barred from owning guns.

To see the many problems of H.R. 2640, see Gun Rights 101: Mental health checks for gun purchases.

CENTRALIZING MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS

Regardless of whether Congress saddles you with a “government option,” the increased centralization and computerization of medical records – including mental health records – being debated would give the federal government vast new powers to decide who is a “mental defective.”

As but one example, consider the following language on page 304 of the current health care bill, H.R. 3200:

“EXPEDITED DATA COLLECTION.—Chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code shall not apply to this section.” [Emphasis added]

And what does Chapter 35 of title 44 section say?

“The purposes of this subchapter are to …

“(8) ensure that the creation, collection, maintenance, use, dissemination, and disposition of information by or for the Federal Government is consistent with applicable laws, including laws relating to—

“(A) privacy and confidentiality, including section 552a of title 5;
(B) security of information, including section 11332 of title 40 [1] ; and
(C) access to information, including section 552 of title 5 …” [Emphasis added]

Translation: The government can do whatever it wants with your private mental health information, including using it to decide whether, by virtue of using an anti-depressant or some other reason, you fall within the ever-expanding list of “mental defectives.”

AND WHERE IS THIS HEADING? CHECK BRITAIN

Following the 1996 Dunblane massacre in Scotland, the United Kingdom passed draconian laws virtually prohibiting the private ownership of firearms. Despite the fact that only a few licensed and registered gun owners remain, by all accounts violent crime – including gun crime – has exploded to the point that police now refer to guns as “fashion accessories for criminals.”

As in the U.S., British proposals to deal with the failure of gun control invariably involve more gun control. It is, therefore, little surprise that Britain now proposes to “tag” individual medical records – compiled under socialized medicine – to see which of the few remaining gun licenses can be revoked.

Says theBBC:

“The British Medical Association (BMA) and Association of Chief Police Officers have discussed ways in which doctors can be made aware of patients who own firearms.

“The BMA's plan to "tag" - or highlight - the medical records of patients who have shotgun or firearms licences [sic] have received a mixed reaction. [sic]

“Last August Bank Holiday [Christopher] Foster killed his wife and 15-year-old daughter before setting fire to their home at Maesbrook, near Oswestry, and killing himself.

“It emerged at the inquest into the deaths that Christopher Foster had been suffering from depression and had mentioned suicidal thoughts to his [General Practitioner].

“This prompted Mid and North Shropshire coroner, John Ellery to recommend a closer link between the medical profession and the police, who issue gun licences. [sic]

“In the last few days the British Medical Association (BMA) has said it is about to update its ethical guidance on firearms.

“The plan is that medical records would remind the doctor the patient either held a firearms or shotgun certificate, or had applied for one.”

YOU CAN’T BAN WHAT YOU CAN’T FIND

The long-range objective of gun registration is to locate firearms ultimately targeted for bans. As noted in past articles, registration is the prelude to confiscation.

Similarly, computerizing vast amounts of private medical information, including mental health data, gives government the ability to locate and, reclassify as “mental defectives,” tens of thousands of people who may have sought counseling for depression, post traumatic stress disorder, “anger management” or who knows what else.

Liberals despise the use of Britain as a model for predicting our future because they know it is a valid laboratory to study the failures of both socialism and civilian disarmament in a culture otherwise similar to ours. It now falls to you to deliver the message to Congress that a vote for health care “reform” is a vote against your right to keep and bear arms.