Posts Tagged ‘Federal’

postheadericon Florida Federal Court Rules That Doctors CAN Ask Patients If They Own Guns

MIAMI-DADE — A Federal Court of Appeals ruled against a recent Florida law that forbid doctors from discussing gun safety with patients. The ruling claims that restricting a doctor’s ability to speak with a patient would be a violation of his or her First Amendment Rights.

via CBS News

“The Second Amendment right to own and possess firearms does not preclude questions about, commentary on, or criticism for the exercise of that right,” wrote Circuit Judge Adalberto Jordan in one of two majority opinions covering 90 pages. “There is no actual conflict between the First Amendment rights of doctors and medical professionals and the Second Amendment rights of patients.”

This opinion was echoed by Circuit Judge William Pryor in a separately published opinion on the ruling.

“The promise of free speech is that even when one holds an unpopular point of view, the state cannot stifle it,” he wrote. “The price Americans pay for this freedom is that the rule remains unchanged regardless of who is in the majority.”

Any law that suppresses speech is as dangerous as any law that suppresses the ownership of firearms. Both can be used in and out-of-context to restrict the liberties of American citizens.

There ought not be any law stopping a medical professional from discussing firearms with a patient. One of the alarming things I’ve seen is the reports of General Practitioners and allied medical professionals asking patients if they own firearms — regardless of whether or not it has anything to do with the actual examination.

To what purpose does that question serve as a general assessment of an individual’s health?

Now, there is no need to prohibit asking such a question. That’s ridiculous and arguably a violation of an individual’s right to free speech. There is also no necessity to answer the question.

If I was to walk into the office of my General Practitioner and he asked if I owned firearms, I could simply not respond. I could say, “I decline to answer the question.”

There’s nothing stopping me from doing so. There’s nothing stopping anyone from declining to answer that line of questioning. If I ever enter into a state where I feel the presence of firearms may be detrimental to my health, I will take the appropriate steps to fix that. Up until that point, my medical well-being has precisely nothing to do with my possession of firearms.

That said, crafting laws intended to restrict basic liberties such as free speech or the possession of firearms is a huge step over the boundaries of what are considered inalienable liberties. We already have enough laws restricting possession, transfer, and ownership of firearms — and plenty that restrict how we communicate and broadcast information. Why add any more if we can help it?

Concealed Nation

postheadericon A Federal Gun Registry Could Be Coming To Hawaii

By Robert Farago via The Truth About Guns

“Hawaii could become the first state in the United States to enter gun owners into an FBI database that will automatically notify police if an island resident is arrested anywhere else in the country,” bigstory.ap.com reports. “Most people entered in the ‘Rap Back’ database elsewhere in the U.S. are those in ‘positions of trust,’ such as school teachers and bus drivers, said Stephen Fischer of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division. Hawaii could be the first state to add gun owners.” The FBI describes the system thus . . .

The Rap Back Service provides authorized agencies with notification of criminal, and, in limited cases, civil activity of individuals that occurs after the initial processing and retention of criminal or civil transactions. Rap Back does not provide new authority to agencies, including the FBI, for collection of biometric and biographical information. It does, however, implement new response services to notify agencies of subsequent activity for individuals enrolled in the service. Including a more timely process of confirming suitability of those individuals placed in positions of trust and notification to users of criminal activity for those individuals placed on probation or parole.

I’m not exactly sure who can access this database, but the Firearms Owners Protection Act is completely clear on its prohibition against ANY federal database of guns or gun owners.

No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.

Now a clever man might wonder WTF. The paper records of firearms sales — recorded on ATF Form 4473 — violates FOPA. And I wouldn’t argue the point. But Hawaii’s move is in direct contradiction of FOPA’s mandate. Which hasn’t stopped its supporters from a) proposing it and B) trumpeting it as the shape of things to come.

Supporters say the law would make Hawaii a leader in safe gun laws. Allison Anderman, a staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the bill was “groundbreaking,” and that she hadn’t heard of other states introducing similar measures . . .

Sen. Will Espero, who introduced the bill, and the Honolulu Police Department said Hawaii could serve as a model for other states if it becomes the first to enact the law.

Surely the courts will strike this down! Don’t call gun control advocates Shirley.

Legal experts say the bill could face challenges, but would probably hold up in court. Recent Supreme Court rulings have clarified states’ ability to regulate gun sales, said David Levine, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law.

The bill will undergo a legal review process by departments including the Attorney General’s Office, which supported the bill, before Gov. David Ige decides if he will sign it into law, said Cindy McMillan, a spokeswoman for the governor.

The cost to enter names in the database will be covered by a fee paid by gun owners, which wasn’t defined in the bill.

If the Aloha State legislators’ legal advisors can read the U.S. Constitution, and not ignore what they read, this one won’t pass muster. But the smart money’s on Hawaii — the island state where gun rights go to die — passing this bill. Will the FBI play ball? Watch this space.

In any case, this move proves that the fight for gun rights in one state is a fight for gun rights in every state. In case you’re one of those let-California-stew-in-its-own-tyrannical-juices types.

Concealed Nation

postheadericon Message From A Federal Employee Who Wants To Be Armed On The Job. What’s He To Do?

A reader sent us the following message that no doubt goes through the minds of many people that are in similar situations: I am a federal employee at an Air Traffic Control facility. Like most ATC facilities we are located … Continue reading
Concealed Nation

postheadericon Women in Federal cybersecurity – How did they get their start?

While there may still be only a handful of women in Information Security, they can be found in increasing numbers in important, high-profile positions. In this post we look at how three women in Federal cybersecurity got their start.

The post Women in Federal cybersecurity – How did they get their start? appeared first on We Live Security.


We Live Security » Languages » English

postheadericon [BREAKING] Federal Judge Says Ban On Interstate Transfers Of Handguns Is Unconstitutional

Today, The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms won a huge federal court ruling after a Federal Judge declares that the ban on interstate transfer of handguns is unconstitutional. The full text can be viewed here. There is … Continue reading
Concealed Nation