🇳🇱
@icedquinn No one is asking for background checks for guns, we already have that so its not a ask... what they want is a violation of medical history to occur in **addition** to ones criminal background check.. they just wont say what they actually want because they know how weak an ask like that sounds when it comes to privacy rights.
It is certainly possible. It is really the only reason im glad we have some extremists on the right in SCOTUS like clarence... he may be a complete dipshit, but he may at least help invalidate any anti-2A attempts for the next few years till people come to their senses.
however
there are people who do support at face value background checks and such for firearms.
my question is why then why don't we check if a politician has similar issues that make them prone to using the office for gross destruction
@icedquinn Because they know what they want is a violation of rights and fairness. They dont mind it on guns because they dont mind "cheating" when its something they are against... but when its not something they are against, like their own politicians, then it is an unthinkable infringement.
although thats rather hilarious because the insurance codes are so detailed as to eliminate whatever privacy anyone thought existed :comfystoner:
...
No.
Just, no.
It's how doctors communicate, how the insurance fuckers use it is their fault, not doctors
doctors don't use it, they read the records.
i didn't have any background checks in food cert to see if i was a known poisoner or typhoid risk.
@freemo @icedquinn Ooh. Good context.
Unfortunately that type of thing seems to have bipartisan support so I’m sure we’ll get that in five years or so.