IMPORTANT GOA Notice

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Marlin, Apr 2, 2009.

  1. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    13,846
    Location:
    At SouthernMoss' side forever!
    Health Plan Threatens to Feed Your Gun-related Data Into a National
    Database
    --- And charge you $10,000 a year for the privilege

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
    http://www.gunowners.org

    Thursday, April 2, 2009

    In a year when trillion dollar bailouts have become routine, many
    Americans have become almost numb to our acceleration towards socialism.

    But gun rights activists aren't in that crowd, and so GOA has to inform
    you of yet ANOTHER threat to your privacy, the Second Amendment, and
    even your wallet.

    It is called an "individual mandate" or, alternatively, the
    "Massachusetts plan." And over the weekend, both the Washington Post
    and the New York Times worked hard to build momentum for it.

    First, a little history.

    We alerted you a few weeks ago to the gun control provisions in the
    stimulus bill that President Obama signed in February. Our government
    will now spend between $12 and $20 BILLION to require the medical
    community to retroactively put our most confidential medical records
    into a government database -- a database that could easily be used to
    deny veterans (and other law-abiding Americans) who have sought
    psychiatric treatment for things such as PTSD.

    Currently, gun owners can avoid getting caught in this database by
    refusing to purchase health insurance or by purchasing insurance with a
    carrier that has not signed an agreement with the government to place
    your records in a national database.

    But that's all about to change. A budget resolution -- to be voted on
    this Friday in the Senate -- will be the first domino in a process that
    could FORCE you to buy government-approved insurance, thus making it
    impossible to avoid the medical database.

    Put another way: If you do not have health insurance -- or,
    potentially, if you do not have the TYPE of health insurance the
    government wants you to have -- the government will force you to
    purchase what it regards as "acceptable" health insurance.
    And, in most
    cases, you will have to pay for it out of your own pocket.

    What would all this cost? Based on comparable insurance currently on
    the market, it could cost $10,000 a year -- or more.

    If you were jobless, the socialists would probably spot you the ten
    grand. But if you are middle class and can't pay $10,000 because of
    your mortgage payments, your small business, or your kids' college
    education, you would be fined (over $1,000 a year currently in
    Massachusetts). And, if you couldn't pay the confiscatory fine, you
    could ultimately be imprisoned.

    Scary, you say. But why is this a Second Amendment issue? Under the
    Massachusetts plan, your MANDATED insurance carrier has to feed your
    medical data into a centralized database -- freely accessible by the
    government under federal privacy laws.

    So... remember when your pediatrician asked your kid if you have a
    firearm in the home? Or when your dad was given a prescription for
    Zoloft because of his Alzheimer's? Or when your wife mentioned to her
    gynecologist that she had regularly smoked marijuana ten years ago?

    All of this would be in a centralized database. And all of it could
    potentially be used to vastly expand the "prohibited persons" list
    maintained by the FBI in West Virginia.

    How serious a threat is this?

    If it gets into the budget resolution the Senate will consider on
    Friday, it will be almost impossible to strip out later. It will be as
    much of a done-deal as the stimulus package was.

    We have asked senators to introduce language to prohibit such an
    individual mandate for socialized medicine that would violate the
    privacy of gun owners. In the absence of such an amendment, we are
    asking senators to vote against the budget resolution.

    ACTION: Write your U.S. Senators. Urge them to vote against the budget
    resolution if it does not contain language prohibiting a mandate that
    Americans buy government-approved health insurance against their will.

    Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
    pre-written e-mail message below.

    ----- Pre-written letter -----

    Dear Senator:

    A budget resolution that could end up requiring Americans to purchase
    expensive health insurance policies against their will is truly
    frightening.

    And equally alarming is the fact that such mandated health care coverage
    could easily become a shill for gun control.

    Potentially, anyone who does not have health insurance-- or does not
    have the TYPE of health insurance the government wants them to have --
    will be forced to purchase "acceptable" health insurance and
    pay for it
    out of our own pockets.

    Based on the cost of comparable insurance currently on the market, that
    could cost $10,000 a year -- or more.

    That's bad enough. But far worse, such a "Massachusetts Plan" would
    MANDATE that an insurance carrier feed medical data into a centralized
    database -- freely accessible by the government under federal privacy
    laws.

    Hence, a kid's statement to his pediatrician about his parents'
    firearms... or a dad's prescription for Zoloft because of his
    Alzheimer's... or a wife's statement to her gynecologist about her
    regular use of marijuana ten years ago... could all turn up in a federal
    database and unconstitutionally expand the list of "prohibited
    persons."
    Individuals would have no ability to opt out.

    For all of these reasons, if the budget resolution does not contain
    language prohibiting an "individual mandate" regarding health
    care, I would ask that you oppose the budget resolution.

    Sincerely,


    ****************************
     
  2. Mr. Nameless

    Mr. Nameless New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    Coast of N.C.
    WHAT IN THE H*** ARE THOSE MORONS THINKING!!! THIS IS NOT HE PERFECT LITTLE WORLD THEY HAVE INE THEIR DREAMS. THIS IS REALITY, PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY. I AM ABOUT TO WALK RIGHT UP TO OUR SO CALLED "PRESIDENT" AND ASK HIM "WHT THE H*** ARE YOU THINKING EVEN CONSIDERING THIS, ARE YOU STUPID, IS THAT IT, DO YOU NEED SOMEONE TO COME OUT HERE AND HOLD YOUR HAND THAT ACTUALLY HAS SOME COMMON SENSE?" DOES HE EVEN THINK ABOUT HIS ACTIONS. A FOUR YEAR OLD WOULD BE A BETTER PRESIDENT THAN HIM.
     

  3. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    I just sent emails to both my Senators about this.

    I just had a thought, when the Feds start compiling the lists of the dissenters (if they haven't already), you know that those of us that write, call, email, etc. our Congresspeople in opposition to Barry's goals will be marked as targets for "reeducation."
     
  4. Big ugly

    Big ugly New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,676
    Location:
    Knoxville Tennessee
    I got some reeducation for them, I got a whole book shelf full of em, from Sadam to Khengis Khan. They can suck on my well educated (PG-13) and go (NC-17) themselves
     
  5. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,717
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    Courts have long recognized special relationships in which the disclosure of information is not allowed such as attorney/client, clergyman/church member, doctor/patient, etc. Who the hell do these azzhats think they are making priviledged private information a matter of public record? I'm telling you my blood pressure can't handle much more of this chit. These people deserve to be hanged.
     
  6. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,914
    Location:
    New Mexico
    It’s too bad that my two commie Senators, Bingaman, Udall, and LuJan and WILL vote for this no matter who many times or how loud I scream at them.

    They both have a very solid record, as most if not all dems do, of being members of the ANTI Constitutional party. Worthless ****ers!!!!

    With just a minor alteration of the definition of alcohol, anybody that ever said they were alcoholics to their doctor, would be banned from legally buying a firearm. After all it IS a drug.

    With electronic records, lying on that 4473 would be considered perjury, right?
     
  7. Nighthawk

    Nighthawk New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,330
    Location:
    South Central Texas
  8. Teejay9

    Teejay9 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    Southwest Corner of the US, "Where no stinking fen
    Sent to my Senators, Boxer and Feinstein. I just know how happy they'll be to hear from me. TJ
     
  9. glocknut

    glocknut Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2003
    Messages:
    12,490
    Location:
    THE FORUM MASCOTT...
    It's the tenticles of Fascism... pure and simple.

    mike
    gn