New Foolishness in MA

[GaryS]

House 2005 (H.2005) billed as an “An Act To Prevent Gun Violence” (aren't they all?).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 236 the following section:-
Section 237. The director shall establish a program for firearm screening and counseling. Such program shall systematically screen all patients for the presence of firearms in the home. The director shall, after consultation with recognized professional medical groups and such other sources as the director deems appropriate, promulgate regulations establishing (1) the means by which and the intervals at which patients shall be screened for the presence of firearms in the home and (2) guidelines for safety counseling for individuals that screen positive for the presence of firearms in the home.
SECTION 2. This section shall take effect 6 months after its passage.

If this passes, I will have to have a serious talk with my PCP. Depending on that, I might have to find a hospital in Rhode Island to go to.

It will likely die a quick death, but you can never tell with these bills. The bill was sent to the Joint Committee on Public Health, which oversees medical practice in MA.

The hearing was yesterday. Jim Wallace, Executive Director of the state NRA affiliate GOAL testified against the bill.

It's somewhat disturbing that there are 450,000 licensed gun owners in MA, but only 15,000 members of GOAL.

 

[Squarebutt]

I'm perfectly OK with lying to any medical professionals who inquire about that subject. It's none of their business, they've not been trained in the subject and with some doctors there's a significant risk of having them launch a "red flag" operation against you just because of their political views.

 

[Watchdog]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. Chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 236 the following section:-
Section 237. The director shall establish a program for firearm screening and counseling. Such program shall systematically screen all patients for the presence of firearms in the home. The director shall, after consultation with recognized professional medical groups and such other sources as the director deems appropriate, promulgate regulations establishing (1) the means by which and the intervals at which patients shall be screened for the presence of firearms in the home and (2) guidelines for safety counseling for individuals that screen positive for the presence of firearms in the home.

SECTION 2. This section shall take effect 6 months after its passage.

Without knowing what Chapter 111 of the General Laws of Massachusetts pertain to, this is totally meaningless to anyone who reads it.

"Patients"? Whose patients? Hospital patients? Regular ol' doctor's patients? Dental patients? Really, what kind of patients?

And "The director"? Director of what?

Seriously, what are we talking about here? Apparently Massachusetts wants to pass a law that'll require some sort of "screening" for firearms of as yet unspecified "patients" of as yet unspecified types of doctors? Then someone referred to here as "the director" will decide after the law is passed just who will do the "screening" and how it'll be done?

Seems to me that whoever this "director" is and what he's director of has, or will have, an inordinate amount of power that could be easily misused.

This needs some clarification, because right now the quoted section makes no sense at all to me.

 

[glenwolde]

Do they not realize that everybody lies about smoking, drinking, cheeseburgers...and now this?

 

[GaryS]

Chapter 111 of the MGL regards "Public Health. There are various sub sections, so I won't go into all of them. The bill is aimed at primary care physicians who see patients on a regular basis. Or so it seems.

The real problem is that it allows the "director", by which I think they actually mean Commissioner of Public Health, to come up with regulations that have the force of law. That's usually done under the guise of "Code of Massachusetts Regulations" (CMR) which are supposed to have public hearings before being enacted.

Items number 1 and 2 are where the problem lies. This allows the "director", a term not defined in Chapter 111 Section 1, to make such regulations as he or she thinks fit.

In essence, it treats firearms ownership as a disease to be screened for. They intent is for the physicians to enter the information into the patients medical records.

And yes, you're correct, the "director" will have almost unfettered power to require screening and "education." One thing I will guarantee is that actual firearms instructors will not be involved in this.

Without knowing what Chapter 111 of the General Laws of Massachusetts pertain to, this is totally meaningless to anyone who reads it.

"Patients"? Whose patients? Hospital patients? Regular ol' doctor's patients? Dental patients? Really, what kind of patients?

And "The director"? Director of what?

Seriously, what are we talking about here? Apparently Massachusetts wants to pass a law that'll require some sort of "screening" for firearms of as yet unspecified "patients" of as yet unspecified types of doctors? Then someone referred to here as "the director" will decide after the law is passed just who will do the "screening" and how it'll be done?

Seems to me that whoever this "director" is and what he's director of has, or will have, an inordinate amount of power that could be easily misused.

This needs some clarification, because right now the quoted section makes no sense at all to me.

 

[TTSH]

House 2005 (H.2005) billed as an “An Act To Prevent Gun Violence” (aren't they all?).

The radical moonbat state rep (from Boston - who could have guessed ) who filed this nonsense happens also to be an ER doctor in Boston. I'm sure he sees a lot of gunshot wounds as parts of Boston are a shooting gallery... not nearly as bad as Chicago, but bad enough. In his situation and given his politics, you can almost understand why he believes gun ownership, legal or otherwise, is a disease. When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you are a doctor, everything looks like a disease.

I doubt this bill is going anywhere, but you can never be sure of anything in crazy moonbat Massachusetts.

 

[tops]

Not only MA but an everywhere problem. People like to dance but most are freeloaders that want someone else to pay the fiddler. Larry

 

[mauser9]

Good state to move away from period!!!

 

[GaryS]

Look at some of the other bill he's filed or co sponsored.

The radical moonbat state rep (from Boston - who could have guessed ) who filed this nonsense happens also to be an ER doctor in Boston. I'm sure he sees a lot of gunshot wounds as parts of Boston are a shooting gallery... not nearly as bad as Chicago, but bad enough. In his situation and given his politics, you can almost understand why he believes gun ownership, legal or otherwise, is a disease. When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you are a doctor, everything looks like a disease.

I doubt this bill is going anywhere, but you can never be sure of anything in crazy moonbat Massachusetts.

 

[TTSH]

Look at some of the other bill he's filed or co sponsored.

Oh, I understand. Full activist moonbat. Look at his district and tell me we should expect anything different.

 

[ParadiseRoad]

...does "screening" include a SWAT team knocking down your door and "testing you" for "presence of firearms"?...

 

[TTSH]

...does "screening" include a SWAT team knocking down your door and "testing you" for "presence of firearms"?...

Actually, there was a recent "swatting" event in my quiet little MA town. Glad I wasn't the victim or a neighbor. The entire neighborhood was evacuated for more than an hour, even a couple streets over. Crazy stuff!

Funny thing in this case was that the cops knew the address (obviously) and could have called inside with reverse 911 to see if anyone was actually home. Turns out the place was empty and it was all a hoax. Might have saved a lot of trouble for a lot of folks... but at least it did give the cops some practice for doing "Red Flag" confiscations in the future.

 

[GerSan69]

House 2005 (H.2005) billed as an “An Act To Prevent Gun Violence” (aren't they all?).
If this passes, I will have to have a serious talk with my PCP. Depending on that, I might have to find a hospital in Rhode Island to go to.

Hey Gary, why don't you come down here to the AZ? There's got to be at least as many of us from up there as there are natives, so you won't miss a thing except crappy weather and even crappier gun laws.

 

[italiansport]

Born and raised in moonbat Massachusetts and very thankful for being an Arizona resident now.
Jim

 

[jimbo728]

Screening for gun ownership huh? Isnt that what King George did just before the American Revolution.
Good luck to all in Ma. As I reflect on this, good luck to all of us.
Jim