BREAKING: Obama Releases New Executive Actions on Gun Control

HIPPA (courtesy captricity.com)“The Obama administration on Friday proposed two new executive actions to make it easier for states to provide mental health information to the national background check system, wading back into the gun control debate after a months-long hiatus,” foxnews.com reports. “One proposal would formally give permission to states to submit ‘the limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands,’ without having to worry about the privacy provisions in a law known as HIPAA. “The other proposal would clarify that those who are involuntarily committed to a mental institution — both inpatient and outpatient — count under the law as ‘committed to a mental institution.’ According to the administration, this change will help clarify for states what information to provide to the background check system, as well as who is barred from having guns. “

comments

  1. avatar Timbo says:

    One proposal would formally give permission to states to submit ‘the limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands,’ without having to worry about the privacy provisions in a law known as HIPAA.

    Of course they don’t have to worry about the privacy provisions of HIPAA. It is only federal law. It only applies to His subjects.

  2. avatar Paul G. says:

    It’s for the children.

    1. avatar B says:

      You must have missed Chris Rocks’s press conference where he said Obama was our father. Well, the adoption came through, WE are the children and this is all for our own good because we can’t make our own decisions.

  3. avatar S.CROCK says:

    step #2316 of the slippery slope.

    1. avatar Chad says:

      Yeah, there’s some real incentive to seek treatment for things like PTSD. One more way to screw out veterans.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Now we’ll have to commit suicide by means of instruments other than guns instead of getting treatment.

        1. avatar S.CROCK says:

          America sure knows how to show respect to the ones that kept it free for this long.

  4. avatar jordanvraptor says:

    Committed to an outpatient mental institution?
    So if you are told to see a therapist you lose your gun rights?
    This really lowers the standard of danger to self or others.

  5. avatar Shire-man says:

    HIPAA and privacy = ACLU all in a tizzy
    guns = ACLU ignoring

    “Involuntary commitment” will be, already is, loaded with abuses. Now they get the bonus of nullifying your 2nd Amendment rights. Let me guess, the process for clearing your record will take years and cost thousands? Shocked I say. Shocked.

    1. avatar ricnroll says:

      After having spent 15 yrs after a 5 day mandatory psych visit for a botched suicide attempt, with no problems whatsoever. I have bought many a revolver and pistols before and since sans beaurocratic b.s. So far.

  6. avatar WoodyTX says:

    I don’t trust this administration, but I’m okay with keeping people who have been involuntarily committed to an institution away from guns. Of course, there would need to be a way to remove one’s name in case of false accusations, etc.

    I’m not sure about the first one, however. I’d need to read the original, and see how it is implemented. Again, I don’t trust these guys.

    1. avatar Ross says:

      I don’t trust this administration period, this will do nothing to keep guns out of the wrong hands, evil, crazy & stupid
      will always find a way.

      1. avatar Rich Grise says:

        No, the evil ones get guns. The evil ones want to be the ONLY ones with guns.

    2. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      “… but I’m okay with keeping people who have been involuntarily committed to an institution away from guns. ”

      You mean while they are in the institution? Or after they get out?

      Because if you can’t trust them why are you letting them out in the first place?

      1. avatar Rich Grise says:

        So, now you’re supporting incarcerating people for thoughtcrime, without a trial?

        1. avatar Chip in Florida says:

          No.

          Sorry, it was an incomplete thought and in reaction to the above. The conversation invariably turns to ‘do I support the mentally unstable to have access to guns?’ To which I reply if they are known to be mentally unstable enough to be a danger then why are they not under a doctors care and supervision?

          It is the other half of the ‘prohibited persons’ argument. If a ‘criminal’ released from prison at the end of their sentence is too dangerous to be allowed to own a firearm then why are they being released at all?

    3. avatar Scottlac says:

      If they are “involuntarily committed to a mental institution” how do they get to the gun store in the first place?

      1. avatar Ross says:

        Weekend release I guess.

      2. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        damn! they discovered the evil “gun show loophole” that Bloomy has been b!tchin’ about for years

    4. avatar Tommy says:

      If police, military and/or any other state or federal employee is also prohibited from owning, possessing or even being allowed to carry a firearm while on duty because they have been “involuntarily” committed then I’ll be fine with this law. The thing is that every LEO involved in a shooting is required to go to see a mental health professional, so that is in my book involuntarily being committed as an outpatient.

      If they don’t like my idea, then repeal this executive action.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Won’t the PA state trooper’s case discussed recently come under this ruling?

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        They are required to see one i order to keep their job; they cannot be physically compelled to do so. It’s entirely different.

    5. avatar nnjj says:

      Step 2: Instruct police to involuntarily commit all persons found to be gun owners.

    6. avatar rb1990 says:

      My fiance was involuntarily committed by her parents when she was sixteen. She has a thyroid condition caused by Lyme Disease, which is successfully calmed with medication. They did not understand her medical needs at the time, and took a drastic route that could permanently affect her life. Fortunately, they put forth the effort to pull her from the institute and get the commitment expunged from her record. She hss never hurt anybody when she was off medication, she simply had very powerful mood swings and tended to throw tantrums. As she grew to understand her physical illness and become more mature, she gained control of the issue and rarely gets overtly angry over small issues.

      Do you still think any all involuntary commitments should mean a revocation of our 2nd Amendment Rights? That is a very broad statement woth many negative implications.

    7. avatar Rich Grise says:

      “Well, it says here that you didn’t say your daily praises to Our Glorious Beloved Infallible Commissar – you’re obviously insane.”

      1. avatar Robb says:

        Would this apply to atheists as well?

        1. avatar Rick says:

          I don’t think of us as “atheists” as much as I do “infidels”, “blasphemers” or “heretics.”

        2. avatar Rich Grise says:

          What do you call a guy who realizes that everybody’s worshiping the wrong God?

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          He may be a visionary, but most will consider him a lunatic.

        4. avatar Rich Grise says:

          Well, the Bible was written by old men who were hearing voices. 😉

        5. avatar Rick says:

          Well, the Bible was written by old men who were hearing voices. 😉

          And the koran was written by ONE old man hearing voices; we see how that worked out.

        6. avatar Rich Grise says:

          Well, Islam never inflicted the Crusades on Europe. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Or the Salem witch hunts.

        7. avatar Rick says:

          The moslems seem to be making up for lost time now though…

        8. avatar Rich Grise says:

          “The moslems seem to be making up for lost time now though…”

          Of course, you have documented evidence of this, right?

        9. avatar John in Ohio says:

          What do you call a guy who realizes that everybody’s worshiping the wrong God?

          A philosopher.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave

        10. avatar Scottlac says:

          “Well, Islam never inflicted the Crusades on Europe. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Or the Salem witch hunts.”

          Rich, are you serious? Inquisitions and witch hunts happen every day in the Islamic world. It is normal, daily life there. And, if not for the Crusades, Islamic armies would have overrun Europe centuries ago. The Crusades took the fight to the enemy and gave Europe’s defenders time to get their act together. IF not for the Crusades, we would be living those inquisitions and witch hunts every day just like them.

          I’d love to continue to debate world religion but isn’t this a gun site?

        11. avatar Rich Grise says:

          ” Inquisitions and witch hunts happen every day in the Islamic world.”

          Of course, you have documented evidence of this, right? (and I notice you didn’t deny that the Xtians did.) So, crazy people do it, that’s your justification?

        12. avatar Scottlac says:

          “Of course, you have documented evidence of this, right?”

          Basically, read the news every day.

          “(and I notice you didn’t deny that the Xtians did.) So, crazy people do it, that’s your justification?”

          Every system has abuses. Every system has its crazies. Every system will be used by ambitious people to secure power. As far as the Crusades, I proudly hold them up as heroes and I revere my ancestors who were involved in preserving the civilization that allows us to have this discussion freely without fear of a beheading.

        13. avatar William Burke says:

          Need more palms, QUICK! Come on over. BRING BEER.

          Not YOU, you moron. THE OTHERS. Perhaps Rich, or someone else, will inform you what the Crusades actually entailed.

          I can’t. My mind is blowed.

        14. avatar Rich Grise says:

          Remind me again: In which chapter and verse of the Bible does the Prince of Peace tell people to go murder Arabs?

        15. avatar William Burke says:

          Maybe he got the Special Edition. The one he released by accident when he was drunk!

        16. avatar Scottlac says:

          “Perhaps Rich, or someone else, will inform you what the Crusades actually entailed.”

          Sir William, I am a moron for not realizing what a war entails? Maybe I just imagined all that blood and explosions in my travels in sand countries and hell-holes around the world. Yes, there was lots of hacking and inhumanity involved. It was war. An Islamic invasion of Western Europe would have involved lots of hacking and inhumanity also, just in a different location.

          I am well aware of the standard party line about the Crusades but, you know, there is another side of the story. I’m posting a link to the fun version.

          http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Incorrect-Guide-Crusades-Guides-ebook/dp/B000X1T7MS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1388884991&sr=8-1&keywords=politically+incorrect+guide+to+islam

        17. avatar William Burke says:

          And BALANCED, too, I see. Keep your racist , anti-semitic drivel next time.

        18. avatar Scottlac says:

          What “race” pray tell? I am talking about a culture that wishes to militarily dominate and oppress the rest of the world. Especially infidel Atheists. Yes, they want to kill you too.

          That culture is made up of many races. I am not racist. I am a lover of liberty and have spent many years defending the idea that bowing toward Mecca should be optional rather than mandatory.

        19. avatar William Burke says:

          Arabs are Semites. Most Israelis are not Semites, but have 95% or more European DNA. Look it up. This makes the Israeli government anti-semitic.

        20. avatar Rich Grise says:

          And who, exactly, is maintaining invasion/occupation forces in whose country?

        21. avatar Scottlac says:

          What is this fascination with race you have? I am not talking about Arabs or Israelis. The Islamofacists are made up of a myriad of races including Arabs, Europeans, Persians, Egyptians, Berbers, Indonesians, Uighurs, Turks, Indians, Africans, Chechens, Tagalogs, and many many more. Islamofacism is made up of every race on the planet.

          The common link is not race but ideology. It’s an ideology that wishes us dead.

        22. avatar Rich Grise says:

          ” It’s an ideology that wished us dead.”

          So you’re going to kill them all first?

        23. avatar Scottlac says:

          If they are trying to kill me and mine, yes. I might even defend you if they have you on your knees facing Mecca with a sword at your throat.

          Like I said, bowing toward Mecca should be optional, not mandatory.

        24. avatar Scottlac says:

          “And who, exactly, is maintaining invasion/occupation forces in whose country?”

          There were no foreign troops in Mecca in the 7th century but the Muslims decided to invade their neighbors anyway.

          The Christians and Jews in Israel in the 7th century had no troops in Arabia, the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Coptic Christian church in Egypt had no troops in Arabia, the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Syrian Church had no troops in Arabia. The Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Assyrian and Chadean Christians in Mesopotamia had no troops in Arabia but the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Nestorian Christians across central Asia had no troops in Arabia but the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Christian cities of North Africa, home of the the great St. Augustine, had no troops in Arabia but the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The Kingdoms of Spain had no troops in Arabia but the Muslims invaded anyway.

          The French had no troops in Arabia but in 732 A.D. the Muslims invaded anyway. They were stopped by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in central France. Over a century BEFORE the first Crusade.

          The marauding hoards were distracted and held to fight closer to home during the years of the Crusades and the invasions were paused for a time.

          The invasion resumed after the Crusades and continued through Constantinople, the Balkans and into Austria where they were defeated by the heroic Polish cavalry charging to the rescue of besieged Vienna.

          Yes, I went to Iraq and Afghanistan. I was in Falujah in 2004. I see in the news where Falujah fell to Al-Qaeda forces today. It seems we only fought a 12 year long delaying action. We have watches, they have calendars.

        25. avatar Rich Grise says:

          “There were no foreign troops in Mecca in the 7th century”

          No. I mean, who is maintaining invasion/occupation forces in whose country TODAY?

        26. avatar William Burke says:

          I’m bailing with this half-wit. Keep going; you have more patience than I. He’s going to spew absurdities until he’s spent.

        27. avatar Scottlac says:

          “Maybe he got the Special Edition. The one he released by accident when he was drunk!”

          Well, so much for “armed intelligentsia” all I am getting here is mocking and ad-hominem. This is a gun website but some of you seem to be more obsessed with racism and christian bashing. Have a nice day and I hope the Jihadis are merciful to you.

        28. avatar Scottlac says:

          “No. I mean, who is maintaining invasion/occupation forces in whose country TODAY?”

          Don’t worry Rich, we are pulling out. And just as the Crusades put the invasion of Western Europe on pause, the GWOT paused the large scale attacks on us. They will be back soon enough. IEDs on the interstates and suicide bombers in shopping malls are not out of the question.

    8. avatar UnapologeticallyAmerican says:

      The issue is where is the line? Once we allow any line then that line can be adjusted at will, political will and by both parties. For example… Income Tax. Once totally against the Constitution, but implemented during a financially hard time, and just for millionaires and only 2%. Once it was law then adjusted over and over until it affects everyone. How fair it is has become a political tool for each party.

      Once we say ‘OK’ to any infringement, it will only be a matter of time and political fight until we store out muskets in the National Guard armory and sign them our to go to a range or on a State sanctioned hunt to kill one of the Kings deer.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        It wasn’t even properly ratified. And, until the fifties, wages in compensation for work was not defined as “income” by the IRS. They just suddenly re-interpreted it. For the benefit of the Federal Reserve.

  7. avatar Bob says:

    We will now see an increase of incidents of law enforcement forcefully committing people to mental health institutions.

    1. avatar Ben says:

      My thoughts exactly.

    2. avatar Tommy says:

      As I stated in another comment, LEOs are required to see a mental health professional after being involved in a shooting. That would be considered involuntary commitment. So apply this restriction to every one of them!

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        See a “mental health” “professional” is not the same as being committed. Not at all, at present.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      Technically, the police cannot commit anyone to a mental institution. They can make a declaration under penalty of perjury that they have probable cause to believe that a person is a danger to himself or others, and present that person to a mental health facility of “evaluation and treatment.” The period of involuntary detention (not commitment) varies from state to state, and is theoretically supposed to only long enough for a person to be “assessed” by a mental health professional (can be a nurse). After assessment, a person can be admitted to the facility on an inpatient basis (this is a “commitment”) or released.

      1. avatar JoelT says:

        Technically, but will they follow that technicality? I can see courts and whoever else that administrates that stuff reporting even simple evaluations to NICS system from which they will never get out, and no one being held accountable for giving a false statement. Just because it’s the law doesn’t mean they’ll follow it to the letter, or at all.

    4. avatar ChuckN says:

      Also look for an increase in people from the “wrong” political
      party “accidentally” ending up on the list from which no court
      order will ever get them off. This administration has already
      shown its willingness to use the IRS to target opponents,
      HIPAA won’t even be a speedbump.

    5. avatar William Burke says:

      People have to be sucked into the System. There are many ways – well, there are some ways – like prisons, the mental health system. And there are schools.

  8. avatar ConnorMN says:

    Oh yes, let’s further demonize, ostracize, and alienate the mentally ill…. That’ll do it

  9. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    Ah who needs patient privacy anyways!
    This is a dark day for mental health in America.

  10. avatar Tominator says:

    In Illinois this information is asked for an FOID and CCW applications. I don’t like or trust the Feds to use this information properly.

  11. avatar A-Rod says:

    It has a built in “Bad Guy” Provision meaning that bad guys are exempt from following this law.

  12. avatar TXGal says:

    Are there really THAT many former mental patients out there just waiting to go on a killing spree?
    If a nut case is determined, lots of ways to do it without a gun. Sandy Hook would not have been prevented so what is the point. Anybody else think we no loner have a representaive government but rather are being ruled by “royal decree”?

  13. avatar DrewR55 says:

    “Quick, our last pivot to the economy wasn’t a successful distraction. Let’s pivot to something else before the public start’s asking about their health plans…. I know, guns are bad, mmm’kay?”

  14. avatar Shire-man says:

    People with mental health issues are far more likely to be victims of crime than perpetrators.
    Let it be shown that this administration actively seeks to disarm victims.

    ACLU where are you?

    Oh, that’s right, guns.

    1. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

      ACLU must still be busy fighting the scourge of our time: nativity scenes (but, strangely, not the one featuring Trayvon).

  15. Involuntary outpatient commitment…

    I think it is disturbing that the administration thinks such people are too dangerous to own a gun, but not so dangerous that they shouldn’t be free to walk the streets to kill people by other means.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      This is the most illogical and most dangerous provision of what the executive action will purportedly do. You cannot be “committed” to an institution on an outpatient basis–“committed” to an institution means you cannot leave, and are therefore by definition an inpatient. This is how the term is used in the authorizing statutes. The administration’s proposal would seem to apply that someone ordered to anger management classes on an outpatient basis could be debarred the possession of firearms, without any determination that that person is a danger to himself or others. Having anger management issues is not necessarily the same as being physically violent. We see therefore an attempt to surreptitiously expand the meaning of “metal illness” to increase the number of prohibited persons.

      Personally, I don’t see the need to disbar the possession of arms to persons who are a danger to themselves–attempting suicide is something that should not be illegal. Each should have the freedom of choice on this fundamentally personal issue. [A an aside, it is NOT a crime in California to attempt suicide (although it will get you locked up in a mental ward), but it is in many states.] Now it is different if one presents a risk of harm to others, but again this should be limited to those who have made credible threats of harm to others. (There was a case in California where the shrink failed to report a patient to the police who had made credible threats that he would kill a particular person when he was released–and he did in fact do so. The shrink was held liable to the victim’s family, and there is now a statute specifying the therapist’s duties in such circumstances.)

      I think it is important to recognize that there is no such thing as John Doe–no person who is definitionally “normal.”

      1. avatar JoelT says:

        Exactly, what do they set as the definition of Mental health and normal? Would someone lose their 2nd amendment rights for visiting a psychiatrist for ADD?

  16. avatar Defens says:

    So by executive fiat he can just change the HIPAA regs? Oh yeah, “Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool….”

  17. avatar Salty Bear says:

    That settles it. I will NEVER seek treatment for my mental health.

    1. avatar CA.Ben says:

      +1
      While I have no concerns regarding my mental health, I don’t trust the IRS (since they run healthcare now) or any other govt. agency with my mental health information.

    2. avatar moofy says:

      That’s silly. Just give a fake name and pay cash. You might run into small problems if you need meds, though.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        No one who visits leaves without a prescription! Who do you think “mental health professionals” WORK for, anyway?

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        There are many medical practices that will not treat without at least rudimentary identification verification. I surmise that the trend began for purposes of bill collections but I’ve know many office staff that don’t realize that there’s nothing illegal about paying in cash without verifying identity. Early in my career, I was briefly involved in a small, rural practice. I was in between treatment rooms and overheard the nurses and medical assistants trying to figure out what to do about a new patient from Mexico who had no social security card or any ID. He was paying in cash. I said, “He’s paying cash and it’s not a serious burn or gunshot wound, right? So… get enough payment before sending him on through and then refund what isn’t billed before he leaves. There’s nothing illegal about it. People don’t have to have a SSN or an ID.”

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          Wow. Robots have even reached the rural workplaces.

  18. avatar Don says:

    “Some states have also said that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s (HIPAA) privacy provisions may be preventing them from making [i][b]relevant information[/b][/i] available to the background check system regarding individuals prohibited from purchasing a firearm for mental health reasons.

    In April 2013, HHS began to identify the [i][b]scope and extent of the problem[/i][/b], and based on public comments is now issuing a proposed rule to eliminate this barrier by giving certain HIPAA covered entities an express permission to submit to the background check system the [i][b]limited information[/i][/b] necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands. ”

    Would like to know what’s behind the terms:

    [i][b]relevant information[/b][/i]
    [i][b]scope and extent of the problem[/i][/b]
    [i][b]limited information[/i][/b]

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      * Party affiliation
      * Donation amount and frequency

    2. avatar Don says:

      could someone tell me how to make things bold and italics?

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Drop the ! before the “b” and “i” and the following will be in bold and italics, respectively:

        less thanbgreater thanThis will be in bold.less than/bgreater thanless thanigreater thanThis will be italicized.less thanigreater than

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Ignore my previous post… oops.

          (Replace the written words, “Greater than symbol” and “Less than symbol” for the actual keyboard characters. There are no spaces in the actual coding.)

          To turn on bold:
          Greater than symbol b Less than symbol

          To turn off bold:
          Greater than symbol /b Less than symbol

          To turn on italics:
          Greater than symbol i Less than symbol

          To turn off italics:
          Greater than symbol /i Less than symbol

        2. avatar Rich Grise says:

          <b>bold</b>, <i>ital</i> 😉

        3. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Yeah, what he wrote. 😉

          @Rich Grise: Show off! 😀 😀 😀

        4. avatar Rich Grise says:

          It took me three edits to get the right number of ampersands and stuff. 🙂

  19. avatar Leadbelly says:

    How the hell can you commit someone to an outpatient facility? Is this code for being sent to a specialist who can prescribe an antidepressant? If so, they’re talking about roughly a third of the population. I’d really like to see some clarification on that one, since “commitment”, by definition, means a residential, inpatient facility

    1. avatar Fiun Dagner says:

      they hold you for a 24-48hr evaluation “for your safety” and release you after they determine that your not a threat to yourself or others

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      No, I think this a court order sending you to a mental health professional as a part of a finding of guilt. Like the woman was who pushed the guy under the subway train in New York before Thanksgiving. But she didn’t use a gun. She couldn’t even BUY a gun legally. See how well it works?

  20. avatar Massan says:

    Ever feel depressed? Ever have a friend/spouse/family member overreact when your depressed? Imagine they call the cops on you due to the misconception that every depressed person is suicidal/homocidal then you get involuntarily committed for a short time “just to be safe”. But hey, guess what? You just lost your 2A now.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Why are so many people here suddenly using “your” when they should be using “you’re”? I swear to god, it’s actually getting worse day by day.

      And keep your nasty comments to yourself about me being a “grammar nazi” IT’S YOUR GODDAMN LANGUAGE, people. RESPECT IT.

      If you’ve had no education, you’re excused. I’m not talking to you. Wasn’t aware we had people with no education on TTAG.

    2. avatar WV Cycling says:

      I had all the signs of clinical depression in January 13, after a bad bicycle accident and injury left me unable to adequately exercise like I typically did.

      So, after the spill, I went from 150-175 (8-10hrs) miles a week to zero. This threw my brain out of whack, and I had absolutely no motivation, and the typical signs of self doubt. I spent nine months on wellbutrin while recovering and attending physical therapy. Never saw a psychiatrist, just family doctor.

      Even then, I was worried about receiving a prescription due to the imminent fear of regulations like this coming into play. Clinical depression can happen due to many things, many of them temporary, such as Post Partum, etc.

      Slippery slope, guys.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Slippery, indeed. And wet with eel sh*t.

  21. avatar detroiter says:

    1) see above comment
    2) what would be grounds for submission to ncis
    3) does the potus have legal authority to interpret a law? Wouldn’t that be a job for the scotus or the a.g. or congress? Put another way does Obama have legal authority to make these exceptions?

    1. avatar DJ says:

      He’s unilaterally rewritten parts of the ACA (Obamacare) and no one is holding him accountable for that. He’s doing it because he knows he can – whether it happens to be legal is irrelevant. Simple as that.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        And he’s repealed HIPAA.

    2. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

      No. But he has been illegally granted the power.

  22. avatar gk99 says:

    here we go again

  23. avatar Fiun Dagner says:

    Form 44-73, Question 11-f: Have you ever been adjucated mentally defective(which includes having been adjudicated incompetent to manage your own affairs) or have been committed to a mental institution?

    “The other proposal would clarify that those who are involuntarily committed to a mental institution — both inpatient and outpatient — count under the law as ‘committed to a mental institution.”

    its the involuntary portion of the first part that gets me. If you’re in the middle of a nasty divorce, or you supervisor at work decides you’re a POS and wants to frack you over, you just lost all gun rights, and can commit a felony without even knowing about it. Piss of a cop, and they can have you summarily commeted for an “evaluation”, and their go your gun rights forever for arguing over a traffic ticket. Yay?

    1. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

      Or God help you if you argue on an Internet board that the government is planning to take away your guns. They’ll use that as evidence that you’re mentally ill……and so take away your guns.

    2. avatar Troutbum5 says:

      It takes a physician’s order to admit a patient to a hospital. For a broken leg of a mental illness. Voluntarily or not. All a cop, or anyone else can do, is provide information to the doctor, who would evaluate the patient and determine whether or not they need hospitalization. And more often than not, their insurance company will refuse to authorize it. Which is bad if you have someone who really needs serious treatment, but might not be bad if your ex is trying to screw you over. A judge can order it, but a doctor still has to admit.

      This is a frightening thing. It isn’t going to work, however it goes. Many won’t make it into the database. Some who shouldn’t be will. It could be abused. And it will stop a lot of people who really need care from getting it.

      O might think he is the king, but the states have to cooperate, and I suspect a lot of them aren’t going to play ball. They would be breaking their own state laws in many cases. The pushback from mental health providers will be massive. They tend to be extremely protective of their patients’ privacy. A good (or bad) example is the Aurora shooter’s shrink. She knew he was giving serious thought to a killing spree, yet did nothing. They will simply stop documenting some of what their patients say, both to protect the patients, and cover their asses.

  24. avatar C says:

    Guess i should try to have that low dose Zoloft prescription scrubbed from my medical records.

  25. This is an attack on veterans. For the administration to seize power, they must first disarm those with combat experience and connections to active duty soldiers.

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      me thinks you are on to something here. . . .

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Correct.

    3. avatar Troutbum5 says:

      Yup. Some of us are wishing we hadn’t dealt with the VA regarding PTSD right about now. If the regime goes down that road, there’s gonna be one hell of a pushback though.

      The NRA, VFW, DAV, American Legion and other vets’ groups need to get in on this one fast. There is a lot of lobbying power there. Not that the king gives a hoot.

      But then, who cares about vets? It’s for the children.

  26. I expect to see advertisements for psychiatric drugs triple this month.

  27. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

    This will discourage individuals with mental problems from ever seeking treatment. While most people with a mental disorder are not violent, some are. Those with violent tendencies will now more likely go untreated, likely resulting in violent outbursts and injuries to others.

    I know, I know, this covers only involuntary commitment, not voluntary admission to a facility or even voluntary outpatient treatment; with or without prescription drug therapy. Well.

    Who would ever seek even voluntary treatment for mental illness, if they knew up front that their privacy would be trashed? Given that, their own responsible, voluntary act of seeking treatment could later be used against them to justify involuntary commitment.

    Then there go your firearms rights and any other right which nameless, faceless, Kafkaesque bureaucrats unilaterally deem you no longer fit to exercise. Once you let that statist genie out of the bottle.

  28. avatar Scottlac says:

    If they are “involuntarily committed to a mental institution” how do they get to the gun store in the first place?

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Fast and Furious II?

  29. avatar TJ says:

    Anybody got eyes on James Yeager?

    1. avatar A-Rod says:

      I am watching Leonard Embody. He lives in Brentwood and I am the next town over.

  30. avatar Ralph says:

    Ya gotta hand it to the Obstard — he doesn’t know when to quit, even when quitting would be his best option. But no, he’s bound and determined to turn his last term into a rerun of Jimmy Carter’s first.

    “Waist deep in the Big Muddy, and the big fool says to push on.”

    Pete Seeger

    1. avatar C says:

      Never interrupt your enemy when he’s making a mistake.

      1. avatar Ima Yeti says:

        Amen to that brother!

  31. avatar John Marke says:

    In this case the consequences of these proposed policies are not unforeseen. People will be less likely to seek professional assistance for mental illness. This is indicative of a government that would prefer solutions that control the people through the use of information than to encourage those with mental issues to seek professional assistance. It is a bold step toward compromising doctor-patient confidentiality. It may also presage compromising the sanctity of the confessional.

    I am grimly reminded of life in the former Soviet Union where dissidents were adjudged as mentally disturbed and subjected to horrific State imposed therapy.The diagnosis of mental disease allows the state to hold persons against their will and insist upon therapy in their interest and in the broader interests of society.

    ‘You must be mentally deranged. You own a gun. You don’t agree with me.”

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Hitler and Mussolini did exactly the same thing to those who spoke out. And it’s still happening in China today.

  32. avatar Skyler says:

    This explains why the administration was encouraging everyone returning from Iraq and Afghanistan deployments with the military to claim they had PTSD to get some veterans benefits. Suckers.

  33. avatar CA_Chris says:

    Actual scientific studies show that the mentally ill are not more violent as a group than the general public, and the seriously ill are usually too disorganized to obtain food and an income, let alone conduct mass murder.

    1. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

      I wouldn’t automatically lump all people with mental disorders into one big pile and label it “Potential psycho chainsaw mass murderers.” Disorders differ in degree and type, after all. However, neither would I buy into a “scientific” study advancing broad conclusions about the mentally ill population as a whole.

      There isn’t any consistent scale as to what constitutes a disorder. One person feeling down might get antidepressants and be counted as ill. Another might be told just to buck up and be considered fine. There are also different standards as to whether particular symptoms amount to a legitimate disorder. One doctor might diagnose your eight year old boy as being AD/HD. Another doctor might diagnose your eight year old boy as being……an eight year old boy.

      Hell, there’s even medical profession controversy over what even is a disorder. For example, 40 years ago, homosexuality was a mental illness. Today, it’s just another lifestyle.

      1. avatar Ima Yeti says:

        To put it simply, a psych diagnosis is somebody’s opinion. Nothing more, nothing less!

    2. avatar beanfield says:

      Well put.

      http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/26/who-is-too-unbalanced-to-be-armed

      mental health professionals are notoriously bad at predicting which of the world’s many misfits, cranks, and oddballs will become violent. “Over thirty years of commentary, judicial opinion, and scientific review argue that predictions of danger lack scientific rigor,” notes University of Georgia law professor Alexander Scherr in a 2003 Hastings Law Journal article. “The sharpest critique finds that mental health professionals perform no better than chance at predicting violence, and perhaps perform even worse.”

      So even if the mental-health criteria for rejecting gun buyers (or for commitment) were expanded, there is little reason to think they could distinguish between future Lanzas and people who pose no threat. Survey data from the National Institute of Mental Health indicate that nearly half of all Americans qualify for a psychiatric diagnosis at some point in their lives. That’s a pretty wide dragnet.

  34. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    So once again Obama issues an executive order in violation of federal law? If I were a state authority (like a governor), I’d say no dice. Get your orders and laws in order, I’m not doing a thing until you do…

    1. avatar Rick says:

      Governors that would do this would have very quietly whispered in their ears “Comply or the Federal $$ to your state disappear.”

      The only counter I see to this is someone barred from the possession of firearms due to information from his medical record leaked to NCIS sue the governor that complied with this HIPAA violation.
      (And run it through a court system filled wit Øbama appointees.)

  35. avatar Dave s says:

    Can the HIPPA law be edited w/o congress? If so lots of things could be changed across the whole spectrum of Government, for example HTSA could say its too hazardous to transport firearms in private vehicles, no weapons allowed on any federal property, shutting down half of the western states. No transport of firearms on highways funded by federal dollars.

    And obviously Medical information is now govt property. say lets send x in for a psych eval, to our pet board of examiners who will determine he is dangerous…

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      “Can the HIPPA law be edited w/o congress?”

      NO.

      1. avatar Fiun Dagner says:

        Yes

        As you will recall the resident has already been changing “settled law” by executive fiat. Look at his extensions for the obomacare sign up deadline for the most recent example i can think of. If no one protests or stops him then he can change all the laws he wants without congressional approval.

        and if someone does protest the look whos job it is to enforce the law, and ask yourself if they really will (black panther voter intimidation, fast and furious, NSA & the 4th amendment…)

        1. avatar Jus Bill says:

          Regardless, it’s still illegal.

  36. avatar Bill says:

    Why doesn’t he just pass a law to get what he wants? Apparently our Constitutional Scholar / President thinks he can do that now.

  37. avatar Jim R says:

    How many times have you heard a leftist scream “gun owners are all insane!”? Now they have the means to make you not be a gun owner by force. All they have to do is call 911. “help, my neighbor is insane, I think he might hurt somebody and he has a gun!”

    1. avatar beanfield says:

      Yup, just remember that this is the guy who’s spearheading the administration’s gun control efforts.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkavwuWE5eQ&t=1m12s

  38. avatar Jus Bill says:

    “…without having to worry about the privacy provisions in a law known as HIPAA.” [This is a quote from Fox news, not the actual document.]

    Still, this worries the living crap out of me. I don’t own a tinfoil hat, but I remember reading about Stalin and Hitler doing this exact thing.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Here’s the meat:

      * Some states have noted that the terminology used by federal law to prohibit people from purchasing a firearm for certain mental health reasons is ambiguous. Today, DOJ is issuing a proposed rule to make several clarifications. For example, DOJ is proposing to clarify that the statutory term “committed to a mental institution” includes involuntary inpatient as well as outpatient commitments. In addition to providing general guidance on federal law, these clarifications will help states determine what information should be made accessible to the federal background check system, which will, in turn, strengthen the system’s reliability and effectiveness.

      * Some states have also said that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s (HIPAA) privacy provisions may be preventing them from making relevant information available to the background check system regarding individuals prohibited from purchasing a firearm for mental health reasons. In April 2013, HHS began to identify the scope and extent of the problem, and based on public comments is now issuing a proposed rule to eliminate this barrier by giving certain HIPAA covered entities an express permission to submit to the background check system the limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands. The proposed rule will not change the fact that seeking help for mental health problems or getting treatment does not make someone legally prohibited from having a firearm. Furthermore, nothing in the proposed rule would require reporting on general mental health visits or other routine mental health care, or would exempt providers solely performing these treatment services from existing privacy rules.

      I’d love to see the exact wording of the rules. Also, did anyone see the Public Comment notice for the HHS HIPAA scope change proposal? I sure didn’t.

  39. avatar aweds says:

    Is there any law Obama won’t try to ignore through “executive orders”??? He seems to think that a republic operates under his personal decree.

    1. avatar MOG says:

      Have not seen anyone contradict him yet, and make it stick.

      1. avatar Rich Grise says:

        Everybody’s afraid to be branded a racist by the professional race-baiters.

  40. avatar A-Rod says:

    It is only a matter of time before someone connects voting records and mental health reporting. ‘Oh, you voted XXX in the last election and you want to buy a gun today. We’ll just make a little note in this file and come knock on your door one day, just in case.’

  41. avatar slow says:

    Health Insurers are now asking, “are firearms present in your home and if so are the firearms secured or unsecured.”

  42. avatar Jim says:

    I dont like any new regs either but everybody needs to keep in mind that someone has usually got to be pretty far gone to be INvoluntarily commited these days. Show up at a hospital and say youre having suicidal/homicidal thoughts, you’ll be VOLUNTARILY presenting yourself and submitting to treatment. I have several relatives that work in the mental health field in various capacities and some of the things I hear make me wonder how we dont have more mental institutions. Thats a big part of the reason why there arent more involuntary commitments. Theres just no place to put them. Plus the reliance on psych meds, which is a ticking bomb at best. Look for that to be the next step…anyone who has been prescribed an antidepressant or any other psych med will have their info handed over to the govt.

    1. avatar Fiun Dagner says:

      It’s only voluntary until you say you want to leave. The second you try to leave and they don’t want to let you it becomes In-voluntary

      1. avatar Ima Yeti says:

        If you don’t have insurance, it’s much easier to leave.

        1. avatar Troutbum5 says:

          Or, more commonly, your insurance won’t approve the stay. For better or worse, money talks.

  43. avatar JAS says:

    The problem here is the way they are doing this. Executive Order – that’s just dandy and par for the course. The truth is that they just don’t have anywhere near the votes in congress. So, the admin is playing all mighty ruler, nothing less.

    Mental incapacity, in terms of potentially being able to hurt oneself or others should be left to the professionals in that field, not to the otherwise impotent politicians that have to exercise executive actions to impose their will upon a disagreeable majority of the population.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      And TPTB can continue to do this until a court tells them “No.” And if the court never tells them “No”, well, then…

  44. avatar John in Ohio says:

    This is going exactly where myself and others have tried to sound the alarm over. Don’t let this stuff stand for long. Give it ten or twenty years of ‘normalization’ and most people will not only accept it and think it ‘reasonable’, but many will actually WANT it this way. F*in’ sheep. 🙁

  45. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    From the Whitehouse’s own website…
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/01/03/fact-sheet-strengthening-federal-background-check-system-keep-guns-out-p
    ___________
    Calling on Congress to Act

    While the President and the Vice President continue to do everything they can to reduce gun violence, Congress must also act. Passing common-sense gun safety legislation – including expanding background checks and making gun trafficking a federal crime – remains the most important step we can take to reduce gun violence. The vast majority of Americans support these critical measures, which would protect our children and our communities without infringing on anyone’s Second Amendment rights.
    ______

    1. They have stopped calling for an AWB. Maybe they see the writing on the wall and are just trying to get anything passed.

    2. They call on making gun ttrafficking a Federal crime. My question is, do they really want to pass that and have to perp walk Eric Holder for gun trafficking?

    3. They keep lying about a “vast” majority of Americans want this.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      “… My question is, do they really want to pass that and have to perp walk Eric Holder for gun trafficking?”

      I think a LOT of people would pay money to see that happen.

  46. avatar Paul W says:

    Is this being presented involuntarily for a hold or would this refer to having the people doing the hold decide you ARE a danger? Those are two seperate things.
    Also, you can’t frigging commit someone to an outpatient facility. You can order them to seek counseling, but I’d hope to god that isn’t enough; that’s a pretty regular case of any CPS/APS investigation.

  47. avatar Paul D From Florida says:

    Can you just imagine the party being thrown in Hell. The guest list includes Hitler , Himmler , Gobbels, and Stalin among others.

  48. avatar mitch says:

    I’m sick to my stomach. SICK!!! I’m hoping every single vet here is as enraged as I am… We ALL need to organize a serious protest movement if this turns out to be as insidious as it seems.

    1. avatar BT in Afghan says:

      I agree, serve you country for 25+ years go through shit that would f* up any normal (non sociopath) be told if you need to talk go get counseling it won’t hurt you. Oh yeah by the way now you can never buy or own a gun again… and thank you for your service. This is TOTAL BS!!!!!

    2. avatar MOG says:

      It is most likely more insidious than you can imagine. Never thought this country would come to what it has to date. I don’t expect to be surprised anytime soon.

  49. avatar Ima Yeti says:

    A psych diagnosis is only someone’s opinion. Everybody is trying to find an easy way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. Most psych patients are not dangerous. The misguided efforts of the anti’s are creating more psych patients than anything else. We’re at the point now that the original Lexington and Concord Minutemen would have been thrown in an asylum! Without guns, after all, we’d all be British!

  50. avatar blakdawg says:

    This seems like a great way to make sure that gun owners, or people who might someday want to be gun owners, will never have anything to do with mental health treatment, or even discuss mental health issues with their physician.

    So, while – if it works perfectly – it will take guns out of the hands of law-abiding mentally ill people, it will also reduce (or eliminate) the chances that people with treatable mental illness will seek treatment which would help them. And some of those people will be gun owners, and they won’t be detected – or medicated – until they hurt themselves, or others.

    Most of those will probably be people who harm only themselves; I don’t know how many unnecessary suicides it takes to make up for a Sandy Hook. But we’ll have a few more Sandy Hooks, too, for good measure.

  51. avatar Accur81 says:

    It’s almost like this Obama guy hates the 2nd Amendment and will do everything be can to place restrictions upon it.

    1. avatar Rich Grise says:

      Almost? Have you been living under a rock for the last five years?

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Uh…no. I’ve been stocking up on hardware since before he got elected.

    2. avatar HaHaHa says:

      No this POTUS does not hate only the 2nd ammendment, but seeks to distroy the whole Constitution of the United States of America!

  52. avatar BT in Afghan says:

    “Put another way does Obama have legal authority to make these exceptions?”

    No, but what is to stop him. It is not like he has never overstepped the Constitution before and I’m sure he will again

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      You have to remember that being President, it’s the first time in his entire life that he’s been told “NO.” He’s just unfamiliar with the concept.

      1. avatar BT in Afghan says:

        My bad. Sorry I forget he was a constitutional lawyer.

  53. avatar MOG says:

    Presidential regulation instead of Constitutional government legislation = dictatorship. The more he can get away with in the next two years the more he can pass on to his replacement. He inherited the seeds of dictatorship from his predecessor, brought on by abusing and misusing an atrocity committed against the American People.

  54. avatar Hannibal says:

    The privacy aspects of the law have very large exemptions for law enforcement already. Anyone trusting HIPAA to safeguard their health information from the government is naive.

    1. avatar Troutbum5 says:

      One aspect of the “portability” part of HIPAA is the push for electronic medical records. Supposed to be easier to move patient information, lab results, x-rays, etc around between your primary physician and specialists, and so on. Electronic = hackable = the gov’t either already has it or can access it any time they want to. More than a few of us in the healthcare biz don’t think that was an accident.

  55. avatar William Burke says:

    Here we go again. The Emperor’s Executive Orders are no mere “proposals”, but, sadly, have the force of law somehow. And I can’t understand how. They should only be allowed to apply in cases of declared National Emergency.

    But then, technically, we ARE in a declared State of Emergency, since the end of WWII.

  56. avatar slicer87 says:

    Gun control is like fighting drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to get cars.

  57. avatar Eric says:

    “keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands”

    Sounds like we need more hand control. Guns aren’t dangerous, hands are.

  58. avatar MojoRonin says:

    What about minor’s mental health records, like an abused kid gets a psyche eval and after dealing with those demons, as an adult, their shrink records are still available?

    1. avatar HaHaHa says:

      Or how about a rape victim?

      1. avatar MojoRonin says:

        There are a multitude of innocents that can be affected. And then, defenseless.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      The direction he intends to move in is shockingly clear, isn’t it? I thought I couldn’t be shocked by anything the guy with flies coming out of his mouth could do, but I am officially shocked.

      Somebody here has seen the fly thing besides me, right?

  59. avatar Mark says:

    This lawless administration is unreal. They seem to have a real problem with the “rule of law” that the left trots out at their every convenience.
    HIPPA laws exist Obama. You need to abide by them. They are there to protect the privacy of those seeking medical care. You can’t abrogate them for your convenience even though you do that for every other law you don’t like. Why isn’t this guy impeached yet? He is a greater danger to us than anything coming out of the mideast.

  60. avatar Rick says:

    so if I’m depressed over getting passed over for a promotion, and mention to my Dr. I’m having trouble sleeping, and my Dr. who is really efficient and effective thinks we should investigate depression issues and schedules me for a therapist visit, that visit will be something the “reasonable, keep the guns away from mentally ill” people can and will use against me without the benefit of confronting my accuser or protection under law?

  61. avatar Martin B says:

    Let’s not give too much credit to the psychiatric community. A hundred years ago the standard treatment for a woman with difficulties (“Hysterical”, from the Greek word for uterus) was to manually masturbate her. After a while this became tiring, so doctors invented machines that could take over this onerous chore. This is the origin of the vibrator.

    In recent times they have been taken over by the pharmaceutical industry, which manipulates data to include as many patients as possible. Under their “guidance” the entire population would be on pychoactive drugs if they had their way.

    The recent edition of the US Psychiatric guide is one of the largest books available. Every reissue has multiple new “conditions” dreamed up to provide an ever expanding patient base, and therefore income for practitioners.

    All it would take is for “Hoplophilia” to become a new registered disorder, and anyone afflicted would be forced to spend a little time out in a padded cell.

    At a stroke the President’s dreams would come true.

    So much for the freedom our ancestors fought and died for.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Pedophilia good, hoplophilia BAD!! Breathtaking, isn’t it?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email