Went to the range on Thursday with this cool cat. Anyway I saw this letter posted on the wall. Maybe u guys saw it already but I thought I should post it anyway.

I cant believe the govt is making doctors ask these questions

To me a Gun in the house is as bad as owning a car.  The car is more dangerous than the gun. LOL

so that being said.....They should ask you if you own a car? Then ask Are you angry? If you answer yes than they should revoke your license......

Damn...that's heavy!!

I'm starting to hear a lot about the gov't trying to take the vets guns away, now it seems they're posturing to take ours away too!! 

I guess I shouldn't be suprised that they're using the doctors and nurses in hospitals to gain information and leverage, it's pretty F'd up!! 

i would check it out on snopes and other sources first before i believe it
don't have the time right now

Damn...that's heavy!!

I'm starting to hear a lot about the gov't trying to take the vets guns away, now it seems they're posturing to take ours away too!! 

I guess I shouldn't be suprised that they're using the doctors and nurses in hospitals to gain information and leverage, it's pretty F'd up!! 

i would check it out on snopes and other sources first before i believe it
don't have the time right now

Snopes says it is false.

Snopes says it is false.

I sure hope Snope's is right.

i would check it out on snopes and other sources first

This may be a dumb question but I'm new to "Snopes" etc and am wondering.......

How do we know who runs the website and how do we know the site can be trusted?

Also, how do we know they aren't controlled or overseen by some gvmnt personnel/agency??

Just wondering, maybe I need to loosen my foil hat...lol!! 

Sorry Snopes is FOS. Its run buy Leftwingers for disinformation.

^ for real?

Sorry Snopes is FOS. Its run buy Leftwingers for disinformation.

Reality has a liberal bias.....

I'm getting a little tired of hearing "Oh, you can't trust that source because they have a (liberal/conservative) bias." (Not specifically here, just in general.) Only considering sources that have the same bias as you is a huge mistake. So is assuming that everything with a bias is part of a clandestine agenda. Or that every source that you disagree with is spreading disinformation.

Good info here. Its good to know that "they" are requiring new questions from our health care providers. Should I ever actually get asked those questions I've been forewarned and can answer in the obscure without missing a beat. I don't have to also assume that the jack booted government thugs are nearly at my door because of it.

There are 2 things going on in that letter. The important one can be summed up as "Health patients are being asked questions about their gun ownership. You do not have to answer those questions and your answers might be recorded in your medical records."

That is a statement of something happening and some neutral information about why it matters and what to do about it.

The rest of the letter is the author's interpretation of ~why~ that is happening. All of that is suspect and can be ignored without discounting that gun ownership may, in fact, be finding its way into health questionnaires.

Separating ~what happened~ from the various interpretations of ~what it means~ is a crucial critical thinking skill. An event is news. The interpretation of that event will ~always~ be biased and incomplete.

So what do u guys think is the best response to these questions?

So what do u guys think is the best response to these questions?

I DO Not.

So what do u guys think is the best response to these questions?

As a medical professional who has followed some of this issue for the last couple of years, (read up on the Florida law that would have prohibited doctors from asking such firearms related questions) the answer is:

"Why are you asking?" If they say it's to make an evaluation of the general safety concerns about firearms, ask them what their training is when it comes to firearms. Are they certified firearms instructors? What training have they received beyond their medical training that would qualify them to make a professional assessment about risk assessments pertaining to firearm ownership and use.
Ask them what the information is being used for?
Then decline to answer.

As for the VA asking, I believe it was a legitimate attempt to identify those at risk for PTSD and suicide. It seems to have been incorporated into a larger effort to deny gun ownership to more vets and service members that just those with PTSD AND at risk for self harm.

^thanks

As a medical professional who has followed some of this issue for the last couple of years, (read up on the Florida law that would have prohibited doctors from asking such firearms related questions) the answer is:

"Why are you asking?" If they say it's to make an evaluation of the general safety concerns about firearms, ask them what their training is when it comes to firearms. Are they certified firearms instructors? What training have they received beyond their medical training that would qualify them to make a professional assessment about risk assessments pertaining to firearm ownership and use.
Ask them what the information is being used for?
Then decline to answer.

As for the VA asking, I believe it was a legitimate attempt to identify those at risk for PTSD and suicide. It seems to have been incorporated into a larger effort to deny gun ownership to more vets and service members that just those with PTSD AND at risk for self harm.

Thank you HiCarry

this has been floating around the internet for months.


its facebook chainletter bullshit.

Sorry Snopes is FOS. Its run buy Leftwingers for disinformation.

Is anything not a conspiracy?

Thank you HiCarry

+1

BS or not, good to know

haha......................just say      NO!