Feasibility of pre-MIM S&W revolvers as working guns.

[Dagga Boy]

To be fair, HIPAA mandated rules on patient privacy are kind of important. Really nearly an extension of the constitutional right to privacy. Physicians can (and often legally are obliged to, i.e. homicidal/suicidal ideation, DV, sexual assault, etc) to divulge certain information with law enforcement, patient family/designated guardians, etc, but by and large aside from the exceptions we keep anything you say a secret for good reason. I think a strong emphasis on patient privacy is just about one of the best things we do as an industry.

I would agree totally in principle....yet, how many of the large medical groups are on the fore front of pushing gun control. How many absolute bat shit crazy folks who do meet many criteria for being restricted from firearms purchase are not reported? Yet, when one goes on a killing spree......from that same community, guns are the problem. How many of these folks are not only on heavyweight prescription drugs that do not mix well with guns, but the patients are also mixing those drugs with street drugs. My big take away is the medical community may want to STFU on gun control and quit pointing fingers at a problem they are part of.

If a person is taking any prescription drugs related to mental health (as well as pain killers and others), whatever you purchase is likely reported by the pharmacy. I cannot even purchase more over-the-counter Claritin-D (antihistamine for seasonal allergies) than the directions say to take from different pharmacies, because even those purchases go into a database.

Yet.....smoke all the weed you want, fall into the "user" (thus a "medical" problem) class of drug offender and a vast majority of these folks are not entered into the system for restricting firearms ownership. If we look at how many of the mass shooters who legally purchased firearms had several situations or circumstances that should have gone into the background system.......yet, don't try to buy cold medicine.

[BillSWPA]

The reason I posted about medication purchases being reported is to show that privacy is not what people think it is.

The consequences of less confidentiality will be less people seeking help, which would actually cause more danger to society.

The fact that groups such as the AMA and AAP push gun control does not mean that doctors in general push it. In fact,!doctors along with lawyers are among the most likely professions to carry guns. Unfortunately those who run the organizations do a poor job of representing their membership, which is why I have never been a member of the ABA.

[Dagga Boy]

The reason I posted about medication purchases being reported is to show that privacy is not what people think it is.

The consequences of less confidentiality will be less people seeking help, which would actually cause more danger to society.

The fact that groups such as the AMA and AAP push gun control does not mean that doctors in general push it. In fact,!doctors along with lawyers are among the most likely professions to carry guns. Unfortunately those who run the organizations do a poor job of representing their membership, which is why I have never been a member of the ABA.

And why I quit the FOP. Which gets to the crux of the problem. Trust me, line cops, mental health people working with the real problem children all are very good at knowing what the problem is and how to remove the problems, or at least restrict the problems, yet they work in organizations who are more focused on protecting the organization than the public.

[Wondering Beard]

yet they work in organizations who are more focused on protecting the organization than the public.

One should think of any organization as an organic entity which like all the rest (including us individual humans) is naturally more interested in its survival and prosperity than the purpose for which it was created.

[Drang]

... yet they work in organizations who are more focused on protecting the organization than the public.

One should think of any organization as an organic entity which like all the rest (including us individual humans) is naturally more interested in its survival and prosperity than the purpose for which it was created.

Guess I'll post this again:
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy

In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.

Also, Robert Conquest's Three Laws of Politics:

Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

[Totem Polar]

^^^those are very good.

[Nephrology]

I would agree totally in principle....yet, how many of the large medical groups are on the fore front of pushing gun control. How many absolute bat shit crazy folks who do meet many criteria for being restricted from firearms purchase are not reported? Yet, when one goes on a killing spree......from that same community, guns are the problem. How many of these folks are not only on heavyweight prescription drugs that do not mix well with guns, but the patients are also mixing those drugs with street drugs. My big take away is the medical community may want to STFU on gun control and quit pointing fingers at a problem they are part of.

Just like BillSWPA pointed out, the leading bodies in medicine are no better than the leading bodies in most other professions, so I wouldn't take the stance of the AAP/AMA to reflect the stance of all physicians (there is actually very little the AMA endorses that I agree with myself), as membership in these professional societies is sort of quasi mandatory, especially your specialty/subspecialty society (i.e. American Society of Nephrology, etc) and especially if you're in academic medicine.

Secondly, as far as our ability to intervene on fulminant mental health problems like the Adam Lanzas of the world, we are mandatory reporters of suicidal and homicidal ideation. If you want a free 72 hour stay on a psych ward, all you have to do is wander into an emergency dept and say that you want to kill yourself and others. However, obviously, many if not most people with a psychiatric condition that might predispose them to kill are either 1) not getting help or 2) not saying anything to their shrink that would indicate they are a threat or 3) somewhere in between the two.

For example, Adam Lanza had been seen by Yale Peds Psychiatry before he went on his shooting; 6 years before he went on his shooting. According to a report issued by the state of CT, there were signs in his initial visit that he had serious psychiatric problems, but nothing that would have suggested homicidal ideation and his mother opted to stop seeking psychiatric help for her son after their initial visit at Yale. Barring something extreme and unconstitutional, there isn't really much that Yale Psych could've done to prevent Sandy Hook.

Also, as far as psych meds that don't do well with guns, most of the problems with those meds that I am aware of have to do with self-harm (i.e. teens and SSRIs). None as far as I know would increase an innate tendency towards homicidality. There are millions of Americans out there on psych meds (and on street drugs) who have 0 problems not shooting up elementary schools, so it's not fair to point the blame at psych medication given that there really isn't any evidence that they are the root cause of this phenomenon.

Yet.....smoke all the weed you want, fall into the "user" (thus a "medical" problem) class of drug offender and a vast majority of these folks are not entered into the system for restricting firearms ownership. If we look at how many of the mass shooters who legally purchased firearms had several situations or circumstances that should have gone into the background system.......yet, don't try to buy cold medicine.

Again, I think this is a correlation/causation thing. Pot is known to bring out latent psych problems in some people (it happened to my sister - she is now sober and about to finish her BSN) but again for most people it makes them giggly, hungry idiots. The problem with expanding the list of restricted buyers via either recreational drug use or mental health symptoms is that we really don't have a good understanding of who goes on to actually commit mass murder and why. Obviously someone in florid psychosis who requires adjudication to a state mental facility shouldn't be allowed to own guns, and nor should someone convicted for possession of a kilo of coke w/ intent to distribute. But should someone being treated for mild depression/anxiety or someone convicted of having a dime bag of weed really be considered that much of a threat that their constitutional right to bear arms is revoked? I am not sure if I could go that far myself.

[Nephrology]

oops, to clarify, I mixed up 2 separate things - mandatory reporting of child/elder abuse (related to HI/SI) and then HI/SI which we can use to temporarily remand you into the custody of psychiatric services for 72hrs.

[BillSWPA]

oops, to clarify, I mixed up 2 separate things - mandatory reporting of child/elder abuse (related to HI/SI) and then HI/SI which we can use to temporarily remand you into the custody of psychiatric services for 72hrs.

You did not mix it up too badly. There are a large number of court cases addressing the issue of when a Dr. can be held liable for negligence for failing to take some action (usually warn a likely victim or call the police, but also requesting an involuntary commitment) when it becomes clear that someone poses a danger. This needs to be counterbalanced with the duty of confidentiality, and the fact that taking such action will significantly change the Dr./patient relationship with that patient and likely make many patients think twice about seeking help in the future. Depending on exactly what the patient says or does and what the Dr. perceives, it may well become "mandatory" in a sense.

Lawyers are in a similar situation. Attorney/client privilege applies to past crimes but not future crimes, and a report may be required if significant harm could result, or if the lawyer's services were used to perpetrate a fraud.

[deputyG23]

I am searching for a good carry gp100 as we speak...I think spending time with a double action revolver will improve my lack luster trigger control.

I suspect some ex-security GPs still turn up from time to time. My son and I took my 4" fixed sight .38 GP to the range along with several bottom feeders and the GP was the most enjoyable gun for both of us. The LGS had about six of them left when I bought mine. Sure wish I would've bought at least one more..