dark light

ZRX61

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,336 through 1,350 (of 4,704 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: General Discussion #285665
    ZRX61
    Member

    In related news there was a News chopper following a bear a few days ago as it wandered through some peoples gardens. Then it jumped over a fence into a back yard where 3 people were lazing by the pool. 2 guys & 1 girl. The guys method of escape can best be described as *mincing*. Looked like they were auditioning for the part of the Christmas Fairy. If a bear drops into my back yard the steps I will taking will be LARGE!, not little 1ft steps on tiptoes & flapping my arms about like these 2 blokes.

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881390
    ZRX61
    Member

    In related news there was a News chopper following a bear a few days ago as it wandered through some peoples gardens. Then it jumped over a fence into a back yard where 3 people were lazing by the pool. 2 guys & 1 girl. The guys method of escape can best be described as *mincing*. Looked like they were auditioning for the part of the Christmas Fairy. If a bear drops into my back yard the steps I will taking will be LARGE!, not little 1ft steps on tiptoes & flapping my arms about like these 2 blokes.

    in reply to: General Discussion #285675
    ZRX61
    Member

    I think they said they moved her out of town a bit.

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881396
    ZRX61
    Member

    I think they said they moved her out of town a bit.

    in reply to: General Discussion #285847
    ZRX61
    Member

    Neighbourhood front yard a few days ago:

    http://theavtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Moutain-lion-spotted.jpg

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881484
    ZRX61
    Member

    Neighbourhood front yard a few days ago:

    http://theavtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Moutain-lion-spotted.jpg

    in reply to: General Discussion #286595
    ZRX61
    Member

    Re 1024. Rick, I find this hard to believe, What about Dr/Patient confidenciality?, or doesn’t it exist in the USA. To me, the Dr who has reported one of his patients has taken an anti smoking medicine, is, A) in violation of the patients rights of confidentiality, and B)It means that the “Can’t be altered in any way shape or form by Congress”, 2nd, CAN be amended when it suits Congress.
    If the patient was to be banned, just for taking the anti smoking medicine, under the 2nd, he/she could appeal, as it is an infringement of their RIGHTS under the 2nd.
    It seems you can’t have your cake and eat it, unless Congress says you can.

    Jim.
    Lincoln .7

    To give you a clue to how screwed up the HIPAA laws are that cover patient records/confidenciality etc… Just yesterday I tried to get a letter from a counseling facility that my kid is supposed to attend.. All I needed was the letter to say that I had made several/numerous attempts at getting my kid enrolled in their program & they can’t even do that under current law. It would be illegal for them to state that I had even called or visited them once…They can’t even legally deny I called either… This causes a slight problem as the frigging Court has asked me to get proof that I even tried to get my kid enrolled there.. So now the court is asking me to get the counseling facility to break the law… & people wonder just how effed up the legal system is in the US…

    Top 3 list of people in the US who don’t have the first frigging clue of the actual laws:
    Equally tied for 1st place: Cops, Lawyers, Judges

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881861
    ZRX61
    Member

    Re 1024. Rick, I find this hard to believe, What about Dr/Patient confidenciality?, or doesn’t it exist in the USA. To me, the Dr who has reported one of his patients has taken an anti smoking medicine, is, A) in violation of the patients rights of confidentiality, and B)It means that the “Can’t be altered in any way shape or form by Congress”, 2nd, CAN be amended when it suits Congress.
    If the patient was to be banned, just for taking the anti smoking medicine, under the 2nd, he/she could appeal, as it is an infringement of their RIGHTS under the 2nd.
    It seems you can’t have your cake and eat it, unless Congress says you can.

    Jim.
    Lincoln .7

    To give you a clue to how screwed up the HIPAA laws are that cover patient records/confidenciality etc… Just yesterday I tried to get a letter from a counseling facility that my kid is supposed to attend.. All I needed was the letter to say that I had made several/numerous attempts at getting my kid enrolled in their program & they can’t even do that under current law. It would be illegal for them to state that I had even called or visited them once…They can’t even legally deny I called either… This causes a slight problem as the frigging Court has asked me to get proof that I even tried to get my kid enrolled there.. So now the court is asking me to get the counseling facility to break the law… & people wonder just how effed up the legal system is in the US…

    Top 3 list of people in the US who don’t have the first frigging clue of the actual laws:
    Equally tied for 1st place: Cops, Lawyers, Judges

    in reply to: General Discussion #286596
    ZRX61
    Member

    Aren’t law-enforcement and military personnel routinely ‘evaluated’ by psychiatrists following stressful shooting incidents or combat?

    Also isn’t forcing people to make a choice between gun-ownership and seeking psychiatric help exactly the wrong thing to do? The gun-suicide rate alone in the United States would indicate that there is a desperate need for psychiatric help within the gun-owning community.

    Taking the ‘psychiatric evaluation’ approach to its logical conclusion, why stop at trying to find those who are ‘likely’ to go on a shooting-spree; why not evaluate everybody (well, the non-gun-owning other half too) to try to prevent all those other non-shooting-spree homicides (that make-up the biggest proportion of homicides by far)?

    Nope, in my opinion, psychiatric evaluation is a non-starter.

    Too late, it’s already law in Califailure… & yes, it’s going to stop an awful lot of cops from legally owning a gun… anyone else see a slight problem with this?

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881862
    ZRX61
    Member

    Aren’t law-enforcement and military personnel routinely ‘evaluated’ by psychiatrists following stressful shooting incidents or combat?

    Also isn’t forcing people to make a choice between gun-ownership and seeking psychiatric help exactly the wrong thing to do? The gun-suicide rate alone in the United States would indicate that there is a desperate need for psychiatric help within the gun-owning community.

    Taking the ‘psychiatric evaluation’ approach to its logical conclusion, why stop at trying to find those who are ‘likely’ to go on a shooting-spree; why not evaluate everybody (well, the non-gun-owning other half too) to try to prevent all those other non-shooting-spree homicides (that make-up the biggest proportion of homicides by far)?

    Nope, in my opinion, psychiatric evaluation is a non-starter.

    Too late, it’s already law in Califailure… & yes, it’s going to stop an awful lot of cops from legally owning a gun… anyone else see a slight problem with this?

    in reply to: General Discussion #286813
    ZRX61
    Member

    in my opinion ‘psychiatric evaluation’ is not a workable solution for three main reasons:

    Firstly there is the cost; a ‘reliable’ evaluation is not going to be cheap

    Secondly there is the reliability; how accurate can such psychiatric evaluations be

    Thirdly there is the infringement of liberty.

    I can add a 4th:
    Califailure just passed a law that states that ANYONE who has ever had an contact with a psychiatrist for ANY reason is now banned from ever owning a gun… & that includes stuff like being prescribed Zanax to help with quitting smoking…

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1881973
    ZRX61
    Member

    in my opinion ‘psychiatric evaluation’ is not a workable solution for three main reasons:

    Firstly there is the cost; a ‘reliable’ evaluation is not going to be cheap

    Secondly there is the reliability; how accurate can such psychiatric evaluations be

    Thirdly there is the infringement of liberty.

    I can add a 4th:
    Califailure just passed a law that states that ANYONE who has ever had an contact with a psychiatrist for ANY reason is now banned from ever owning a gun… & that includes stuff like being prescribed Zanax to help with quitting smoking…

    in reply to: Duxford Diary 2013 #997121
    ZRX61
    Member

    Did I miss my summer ? Not again !:eek:

    It was last Wednesday, early afternoon….

    in reply to: General Discussion #286938
    ZRX61
    Member

    Cooper spectacularly missed the point anyway. The caption states that ONE child is holding something banned in America. Funny that because I have never in my whole life read of twenty some odd kids and teachers dying because they were given a Kinder chocolate egg.

    Regards,

    kev35

    Can’t think of an instance where a 5yo killed 20 other kids either….

    in reply to: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think #1882037
    ZRX61
    Member

    Cooper spectacularly missed the point anyway. The caption states that ONE child is holding something banned in America. Funny that because I have never in my whole life read of twenty some odd kids and teachers dying because they were given a Kinder chocolate egg.

    Regards,

    kev35

    Can’t think of an instance where a 5yo killed 20 other kids either….

Viewing 15 posts - 1,336 through 1,350 (of 4,704 total)