Crossroads time. Give up HIPAA rights over new gun? Washington state laws

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

silicosys4

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
3,643
So Washington state has passed a new law that has recently gone into effect.

https://www.atg.wa.gov/initiative-1639

Basically, among other things, as I and everyone I have talked to interpret it, if I wish to purchase a pistol or semiautomatic rifle, part of the paperwork I sign nullifies any HIPAA confidentiality rights I have. Signing paperwork to purchase a pistol in Washington state authorizes the state government to access my medical records at any time indefinitely.

I am looking at a Ruger GP100 and am quiet interested in purchasing.it. I have many other revolvers that fill that niche, but not a GP100.

I am weighing my options and the pros vs. cons of signing that paperwork and am undecided as to whether I wish to sign my HIPAA rights away for a purchase of a gun I don't really need that doesn't fill a void in my collection, that of a .357 revolver.

My thoughts are that if I don't wish to sign that paperwork and give up my HIPAA rights, I will never be able to purchase another handgun or semiautomatic rifle as long as I reside in the state of Washington.

If I sign the paperwork, I will be voiding my rights, but I plan on moving out of the state within the next 3-5 years so I only have to bear the infringement temporarily until I am residing in another state that does not require such onerous regulations and infringements.

I have nothing on my record that would preclude me from ownership, but I worry that in the future any medical or mental health issues I might have could open the door for confiscation and great legal hassles for me regardless of future purchases once the paperwork is signed, as there is a requirement for at least an annual review of my medical and mental health records. As I understand it, anything as minor as therapy for a depressive episode is grounds for confiscation if the state government decides such.

Would you sign the paperwork and deal with it until you moved out of state, or just deal with the infringement and avoid any medical treatment that would open the door for confiscation?
Would you limit yourself to bolt action, lever action, and single shot rifles for the rest of your life?

Thoughts or clarifications?
 
Last edited:
silicosys4 said:
...my rights, but I plan on moving out of the state within the next 3-5 years so I only have to bear the...
Click to expand...

silicosys4 said:
...ownership, but I worry that in the future any...
Click to expand...

If you are planning a move anyway, I would simply bump that up a year or two and not purchase anything until then.Remember, a government simply doesn't look at you as a subject in one regard only, but, as a whole. Its just easier to see in 2A rights; they let the cat out of the bag so-to-speak, on that issue, taxes, etc.
 
silicosys4 said:
...Would you sign the paperwork and deal with it until you moved out of state, or just deal with the infringement and avoid any medical treatment that would open the door for confiscation?
Would you limit yourself to bolt action, lever action, and single shot rifles for the rest of your life?

Thoughts or clarifications?
Click to expand...
Hmmmm....
A: Sign paperwork and allow unelected, likely unqualified bureaucrats rummage through my medical records at will for the rest of my life;
B: Allow that part of my RKBA to be completely stifled for 3-5 years; or
C: Figure out who's mounted a legal challenge to this law, or file my own lawsuit.

I think we all know which path I'd take. While the lawsuit was pending, I would take option B. Refuse to sign, and point out in my lawsuit the conflict that creates.
 
Another idiotic law enacted by morons to take away an honest person's rights while the criminal or someone about to become a criminal will still be able to obtain a gun.
It better go through the court system; however, in this day-and-age of cowardly judges, not sure if it will be overturned; even in SCOTUS!
 
That's even worse than what happens in a lot of jurisdictions in the UK, and I would not sign it.

What happens in my jurisdiction:

Upon applying for a firearm certificate (it is a license) the police send a letter to your nominated physician advising that you are applying for a license. The question in the letter is whether the physician is aware of any conditions you may have which render you incapable of handling a firearm responsibly.
It isn't just about mental health issues, there are physical conditions which could cause you to collapse at the firing line or in some other way not be in control of the firearm. Uncontrolled diabetes is one of those conditions.

BUT...the police don't get to see my records. In fact all they got back from my GP was a note that said "we are not aware of any adverse conditions relevant to this enquiry."
Where this has been an issue is when GPs have wanted to charge the applicant to issue the note, since the work done to generate it is not part of NHS activity. Or in some cases the GP has refused to sign it on conscientious grounds which has left the applicant in a pickle because then they have to find another GP at the same surgery or move surgeries or get the note done privately (where they would have to pay.)

This Washington waiver is an open door straight onto your medical records and there is scope for abuse because you may not find out who viewed the records, who has copies and where the copies went from there. The only advantage I see is the onus is on the police to get the records and reject your application based on evidence found in the records. If I read it correctly, they are absorbing most of the effort and the cost too, so you don't get into a position where the healthcare provider can obstruct your application on conscientious grounds.

But for me, it would be a no-go.
I tolerate what we have in the UK because we have data protection laws that mean the police can't get unfettered access to my medical records. In fact they can't even request an opinion from my GP without the GP informing me.
When the cops sent the letter to my GP, the doc called me straight away and advised they had the letter and what the request was. I could take it or leave it at that point and fortunately for me I was neither charged a fee nor was I obstructed in my application.
 
Sounds like another political decision based on high school student council ideals that seem to emanate from a certain political mindset in this country.

Bottom line is, the state would be violating HIPAA law. I am not a lawyer, but I can read. There is nothing in HIPAA that I have seen or heard that compels a person to give up medical information.

This government website has a lot of useful information regarding HIPAA.
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html

Here is verbiage regarding Law Enforcement:
Law Enforcement Purposes. Covered entities may disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials for law enforcement purposes under the following six circumstances, and subject to specified conditions: (1) as required by law (including court orders, court-ordered warrants, subpoenas) and administrative requests; (2) to identify or locate a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing person; (3) in response to a law enforcement official’s request for information about a victim or suspected victim of a crime; (4) to alert law enforcement of a person’s death, if the covered entity suspects that criminal activity caused the death; (5) when a covered entity believes that protected health information is evidence of a crime that occurred on its premises; and (6) by a covered health care provider in a medical emergency not occurring on its premises, when necessary to inform law enforcement about the commission and nature of a crime, the location of the crime or crime victims, and the perpetrator of the crime.

If you scroll down to the section on State Law on that website (I decided not to cut an paste it here...TMI) it would appear that the Secretary of Health and Human Services would have to approve what Washington State is attempting to do here.

I would be placing calls to the NRA, the ACLU (yes, I said ACLU) and the HHS Dept in Wash. DC if you are so inclined.
 
  1. The applicant’s name, residential address, date and place of birth, race, gender, and driver’s license or state identification card number;
  2. The date and hour of the application;
  3. A description of the firearm including the make, model, caliber and manufacturer’s number;
Click to expand...

It also establishes registration of "AW's" (I assume handguns are already registered in WA?)

Waiting 5 years may or may not solve your problem, as, if this passes constitutional scrutiny, such incursions have a tendency to spread like a virus to other states. Unfortunately, monkey see, monkey do.

Regards,
hps
 
We have to sign a release at the local mental health place every time we get our CC permit renewed in my NC county. Also had to pay them 10 or 15 bucks for whatever reason before but now that part is gone. We used to have to actually drive to the mental place. Pay them and get the paper. Then drive to the court house and get our records from the clerk of court. Then drive to the jail to get finger printed and pay them. Now it's all done in 5 minutes in one office and they do all the running.
I never gave it a lot of thought other than it being a waste of my time. Been that way at least the 20 years I've had mine. I've never heard anyone else complain about it either and everyone I know has a permit. I guess we just assumed it was standard procedure. The sherrif himself teaches the classes to get a permit and is a fan of suppressors so we are far from anti-gun.
Obviously this isnt to purchase a gun but to actually get a carry permit so maybe it's a different case since it's an elective thing? Idk
 
I would say bide your time until you move. You could become an unintentional criminal and heaven forbid they find something in your medical records that puts a big red flag in the background check system with your name on it. .
 
In 1974, while still at the magic age of 21, I was seduced into lusting after a Colt Python that appeared on the cover of Shooting Times. (Picture of said magazine cover attached.)
I found one for sale in the hands of a private person. Already had a NJ rifle and shotgun card. To privately buy it I had to apply to the state, submit 3 letters saying I was a responsible person. My three letters came from:
Chief of Detectives of my city's PD.
Captain of the headquarters precinct of my city's PD.
Lieutenant of police who happened to be the mayor of my city's driver.
All of these folks known to me personally. And vice versa.

It took months to get my approval to buy that one specific gun. In 1974.

Moved to FL. one year later. Was getting on the local PD. Told my Python was okay for duty but needed an off duty firearm. Went to LGS, picked out a nice Colt Combat Commander. Filled out a 4473. Handed over my money. Shook LGS owner's hand an left with the gun in the box in my hand.

No mass shootings going on, no high murder rate. What the heck happened? And more importantly, why is no one seeming to care about what's different now from those many years ago that we are having mass shootings. Seems to me dealing with the why would be more effective than any attempts to deal with the how.

Odd Job said:
That's even worse than what happens in a lot of jurisdictions in the UK, and I would not sign it.
What happens in my jurisdiction:

Upon applying for a firearm certificate (it is a license) the police send a letter to your nominated physician advising that you are applying for a license. The question in the letter is whether the physician is aware of any conditions you may have which render you incapable of handling a firearm responsibly.
It isn't just about mental health issues, there are physical conditions which could cause you to collapse at the firing line or in some other way not be in control of the firearm. Uncontrolled diabetes is one of those conditions.

BUT...the police don't get to see my records. In fact all they got back from my GP was a note that said "we are not aware of any adverse conditions relevant to this enquiry."
Click to expand...

I quoted the above to comment that when I read the quote from the note the voiceover reading it in my head was in a very proper British accent. Now I want to have some tea.

Oh, that gun porn picture:

Shooting Times.JPG
 
If you haven't yet please go to a gun store or range and sign the repeal petition. Be as active as possible in the pro 2A community in WA.

What I did was purchase some of my "want list" firearms before the law took effect as I don't like the idea of signing away my rights.

I am hoping - and counting on - this awful law being repealed or modified but that will take time to work through the courts.
 
I’m going with option E which is not written down... anywhere. Face to face private sale.
Click to expand...

Your choice... However a lot would depend on whether or not the gun has the sellers name on it in any records.
Were I the seller and there was a 4473 (or such) with my name associated, I wouldn't sell without some paperwork that nullified my name.
 
"Face to face private sale."
Private sales are now illegal in Washington State unless processed through an FFL, which brings up the HIPAA issue. I think the state could try to defend this in court by saying you are not required to give up your HIPAA rights because buying a gun is optional.
 
WestKentucky said:
I’m going with option E which is not written down... anywhere. Face to face private sale.
Click to expand...
Yup.
cjwils said:
"Face to face private sale."
Private sales are now illegal in Washington State unless processed through an FFL, which brings up the HIPAA issue. I think the state could try to defend this in court by saying you are not required to give up your HIPAA rights because buying a gun is optional.
Click to expand...
Assuming the position for legislation that makes you a second class citizen and puts you on a list of people who are flagged for greatly increased scrutiny or making another choice altogether isn’t something I’m going to have to dwell on for long.
 
The likelihood that HIPPA non-confidentiality will be successfully challenged is high. If you can wait a bit, that concern will likely go away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Old Dog
Washington state residents, please read
Replies
6
Views
629
Barbaroja
Barbaroja
R
  • Locked
Buying a handgun "out of state" (just moved to a new job)
Replies
17
Views
1K
cpask8
C
A
  • Locked
The mentally ill should not own guns, right?
2 3
Replies
71
Views
4K
RevDerb
RevDerb
P
  • Locked
Concealed Carry Reciprocity with Colorado
Replies
5
Views
1K
Polishrifleman
P
Trey Veston
  • Locked
Looking for definitive source for purchase requirements in WA state.
Replies
1
Views
371
Big_Al
B
Back
Top