Health care and Guns.......

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Just a though.....Would love to here some opinions...

With the passing of the health care bill, could that affect gun owners? They could state that guns in the home could be harmful to your health or your families health....the examples they would use would be irresponsible gun owners leaving their guns were their children can have access and have an accidental shooting....or taking the gun to school. Or when their is an accidental discharge when handling or cleaning the gun and someone is hurt. All these scenario's would lead to a emergency room visit, affecting the cost of health care. This idea was brought to my attention and i could see this being a real possibility.

Would love to hear other opinions.

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

REMOVE. There is nothing whatsoever in the bill that mandates people's lifestyles, gun ownership, or anything like that. Anyone who told you this is lying through their teeth.

I am not for the health care bill for many reasons, but let's not add things that have nothing to do with gun control. People who say this have their own agenda and are trying to get the gun lobby to talk more about this.

If you are upset about the government's big spending, I'd focus on this, social security, defense budget and join the www.lp.org

jimd_21 wrote:

Just a though.....Would love to here some opinions...

With the passing of the health care bill, could that affect gun owners? They could state that guns in the home could be harmful to your health or your families health....the examples they would use would be irresponsible gun owners leaving their guns were their children can have access and have an accidental shooting....or taking the gun to school. Or when their is an accidental discharge when handling or cleaning the gun and someone is hurt. All these scenario's would lead to a emergency room visit, affecting the cost of health care. This idea was brought to my attention and i could see this being a real possibility.

Would love to hear other opinions.

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Wow Pace.....It was a thought that has been circulating....

Nothing in my post said it came from the bill or any legislator. This is a theory....

Wow.....LMAO

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

What bothers me is that the anti-health care people (insurance companies in this case) circulate rumors that have nothing to do with the bill in order to get people like us on their side.

If you are against the health care bill, that is a valid point. What happens is that the politicians come out and make things up -- on both sides, to get people riled up. I posted elsewhere, have you ever met anyone at the TEA PARTY who says they are against health care, but when you ask if their welfare or social security (same thing) is taken away, they get defensive?

The problem with the health care debate is that its complete fake on both sides. The republicans are claiming it will create a public health care system that will fall apart. It doesn't at all. If you have health insurance with your employer, you keep it. The other side says it will make affordable health care for everyone... probably not true, because it still requires people to pay even if they can't.

As for guns, has nothing to do with guns.

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

The only reason i bring this up is history......Prohibition for one.....Tobacco was ok until it was bad to and now see how tobacco products are taxed...and are linked to lung cancer. How long before their will be a prohibition on tobacco. And I can see them trying to hit alcohol after they get tobacco. (drunk driver fatalities....liver failure....)..

Reminds me of a movie....Demoliton Man....

Just my 2 cents

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Dude, alchohol, guns, tobacco are all taxed federally

jimd_21 wrote:

The only reason i bring this up is history......Prohibition for one.....Tobacco was ok until it was bad to and now see how tobacco products are taxed...and are linked to lung cancer. How long before their will be a prohibition on tobacco. And I can see them trying to hit alcohol after they get tobacco. (drunk driver fatalities....liver failure....)..

Reminds me of a movie....Demoliton Man....

Just my 2 cents

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Yea they are....So how long does the federal gov keep taxing them before they take them away.....And if they can take them away what stops them from taking anything else away....

Dude I asked for opinions...not a defensive stand...I will entertain Opionions, not show of force. To ask to have this removed from your first post without a honest opinion about the posibility....show's a real lack of respect.

The Donkey · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Pace is right: There is nothing in the PP&ACA [Health Care Act] thatauthorizes this kind of discrimination.

But then again, there is nothing I am aware of in federal law that prohibits an insurance company from demanding higher premiums from persons that they consider to be at greater risk because of issues involving guns. This was the case before the bill passed, and as far as I know, still is.

This could have been addressed in the bill: sadly, it went out the window with bipartisan reform.

Don't get me wrong -- I like the PP&ACA. But if both parties participated constructively, it could have been better.

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Pace is right....but rude about getting his word out....

So what is to stop the insurance companies from charging higher rates for gun owners? Can we count on the fed gov to regulate this according to the 2A?

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

I believe there will be a required schedule of fees for private insurance plans for single people or families, insurance companies will not be allowed to change them.

That being said, a private business can do what it wants (usually, this changes it) and if they don't want to insure gun owners, its their prerogative. I don't see that happening because insurers use charts which tell them how much to charge (or they used to) and owning a gun, doesnt make it more expensive... actually legal gun owners usually have less accidents, crime, etc.

Sorry for being rude.

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Forgiven Pace....

Ok if they can deny coverage for gun owners.....with this new bill everyone has to be insured....will that affect their charts or will it be a non issue?

slowfiveoh · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Pace wrote:

Dude, alchohol, guns, tobacco are all taxed federally

The difference being, that the individual is not obligated to purchase alcohol, guns, or tobacco.

Enormous, cataclysmic difference.

jimd_21 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

I can see not being obligate to purchase alcohol or tobacco....but guns.....Wow how un-american..... Sorry but learned how to shoot along time before i was able to hunt. I believe buying a gun whether it be a pistol, rifle, shotgun should be a requirement.

As far as insurance...i am not a welfare junkie...i have a well paying job and have insurance through my employer.

eye95 · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:

Pace wrote:

Dude, alchohol, guns, tobacco are all taxed federally

Click to expand...

The difference being, that the individual is not obligated to purchase alcohol, guns, or tobacco.

Enormous, cataclysmic difference.

Cataclysmic to the point that if the purchase mandate stands, The Constitution is officially dead.

Dare I say it? It is time for a constitutional convention. The main argument against one is that it could destroy The Constitution. However, two branches of government have already disposed of it. Unless the third performs its check as intended, a convention can do no more damage than has already been done.

slowfiveoh · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

eye95 wrote:

Cataclysmic to the point that if the purchase mandate stands, The Constitution is officially dead.

Dare I say it? It is time for a constitutional convention. The main argument against one is that it could destroy The Constitution. However, two branches of government have already disposed of it. Unless the third performs its check as intended, a convention can do no more damage than has already been done.

I might agree to this end. Several states will be moving to correct this injustice. If it fails, then frankly, it is on the people to correct.

I am absolutely disgusted that these so called human beings, and so called representatives feel they can chuck the desires of their constituents out of the nearest airlock.

The Federal Government is on autopilot America. WAKE THE F&^% UP!

TheMrMitch · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

The gov tried prohibition......ONCE.:cuss:

Probably never again. They'll go back door.:banghead:

If your doc is the anti gun, turn 'em in type, time to change docs.

Anyways, I lost ALL of my guns in the great canoe wreck on the Rolling Fork river some years ago. I have a sling shot with right side missing.

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Sounds like everyone is being reactionary.

Didn't you know we've been doing these things for yeasrs? We have been forced to pay social security for 60+ years, we've been forced to pay for other kid's eduction. My kids go to private schools and I have to pay for other kids education.

Think outside the box, there are much worse problems than health care. Health care is a small percentage of the problems we have with BIG GOVERNMENT.

The Donkey · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:

eye95 wrote:

Cataclysmic to the point that if the purchase mandate stands, The Constitution is officially dead.

Dare I say it? It is time for a constitutional convention. The main argument against one is that it could destroy The Constitution. However, two branches of government have already disposed of it. Unless the third performs its check as intended, a convention can do no more damage than has already been done.

Click to expand...

I might agree to this end. Several states will be moving to correct this injustice. If it fails, then frankly, it is on the people to correct.

I am absolutely disgusted that these so called human beings, and so called representatives feel they can chuck the desires of their constituents out of the nearest airlock.

The Federal Government is on autopilot America. WAKE THE F&^% UP!

Remember, a clear majority of those polled were either for the bill, or against it because they believed it did not go far enough. Only 42% were against it because they felt it went too far.

Pace · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

Most of the republicans actually proposed the same exact thing a few years ago.

The issue is that there isn't ANYONE in congress who thinks government is really too big. They all do the same thing.

slowfiveoh · Mar 22, 2010

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

Remember, a clear majority of those polled were either for the bill, or against it because they believed it did not go far enough. Only 42% were against it because they felt it went too far.

Remember, quite a few "representatives" have told their constituents that they "knew what was good for them".

Houston, we have a problem.

Health care and Guns.......

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member