Guns For The Elderly

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Guns For The Elderly

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:32 pm UTC

At last! The demographic group responsible for the highest rates of non-alcohol-related vehicular manslaughter can have guns that are easy for them to aim and shoot! The gun is classified as a medical device, and as such, can be prescribed by doctors.

Article #2

Article #3

What could go wrong?

User avatar
Freakish
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:47 am UTC
Location: Northern Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Freakish » Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:35 pm UTC

What a perfect idea! Lets start giving out guns that don't look like guns.
Freakish Inc. We completely understand the public’s concern about futuristic robots feeding on the human population

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:48 pm UTC

The article wrote:Constitution Arms, has revealed the following: 'We thought you might be interested to learn that the FDA has completed its "Device/Not a Device" determination and concluded the handgun will be listed as a Class I Medical Device.' Physicians will be able to prescribe the Palm Pistol for qualified patients who may seek reimbursement through Medicare or private health insurance companies."
Can someone please explain to me how a gun, regardless of how it's been designed is something to prescribed?
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Freakish
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:47 am UTC
Location: Northern Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Freakish » Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:17 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
The article wrote:Constitution Arms, has revealed the following: 'We thought you might be interested to learn that the FDA has completed its "Device/Not a Device" determination and concluded the handgun will be listed as a Class I Medical Device.' Physicians will be able to prescribe the Palm Pistol for qualified patients who may seek reimbursement through Medicare or private health insurance companies."
Can someone please explain to me how a gun, regardless of how it's been designed is something to prescribed?


Because it's for people with health problems.
Freakish Inc. We completely understand the public’s concern about futuristic robots feeding on the human population

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby psyck0 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:20 pm UTC

Why shouldn't ANYONE be allowed to buy it, though? (Apart from the obvious "because they don't really need a gun at all".) Too easily concealable?

Silas
Posts: 1091
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:08 pm UTC

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Silas » Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:35 pm UTC

psyck0 wrote:Why shouldn't ANYONE be allowed to buy it, though? (Apart from the obvious "because they don't really need a gun at all".) Too easily concealable?

I'm pretty sure anybody can buy it (if he wants to spend $300 on a single-shot 9mm handgun with no sights). The 'prescription' bit (as I understand it) is about getting Medicare to cover the cost.
Felstaff wrote:Serves you goddamned right. I hope you're happy, Cake Ruiner

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Xeio » Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:41 pm UTC

Am I the only one who thought this looked like an inhaler? :shock:

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:43 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:Am I the only one who thought this looked like an inhaler? :shock:

It does take the burden off of Social Security...

User avatar
Plasma Man
Posts: 2035
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:27 am UTC
Location: Northampton, Northampton, Northampton middle England.

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Plasma Man » Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:00 pm UTC

Am I the only one who thought "Great! I can trade in my gran for an Uzi!"

On topic: This is a stupid idea. No-one needs a gun, so there's no need to prescribe one. The company will probably make some money off old gun nuts enthusiasts, though.
Please note that despite the lovely avatar Sungura gave me, I am not a medical doctor.

Possibly my proudest moment on the fora.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:04 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote: No-one needs a gun,

Read the articles. EVERYONE needs a gun. Ancient Romans and George Washington said so.

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Gunfingers » Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:44 pm UTC

The elderly are easy victims of abuse, and are often unable to defend themselves physically. I'm not sure of any demographic who needs a weapon more.

It is stupid to have medicare cover it, but then i think medicare is stupid in general.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:51 pm UTC

Freakish wrote:Because it's for people with health problems.
This is exactly my point. How does this address a medical need? I don't disagree with the creation of the thing, I think it's great that someone saw a niche and filled it. What I disagree with is that it can somehow be covered by health insurance.

Edit: And I've been ninja'd by Gun, who (ironically for this thread) said exactly what I was thinking, but with different words.
Gunfingers wrote:The elderly are easy victims of abuse, and are often unable to defend themselves physically. I'm not sure of any demographic who needs a weapon more.

It is stupid to have medicare cover it, but then i think medicare is stupid in general.
On topic: This is a stupid idea. No-one needs a gun, so there's no need to prescribe one. The company will probably make some money off old gun nuts enthusiasts, though.[/quote]So if you live in the wilderness and hunt for your food you don't need a gun? What if fending off attacks by wild animals is a legitimate part of your day to day life? I'm sorry, but no. Some people certainly need guns. Should this be covered by insurance? Absolutely not. It's not a necessary medical expenditure.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
lorenith
Posts: 1123
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:35 am UTC
Location: Transient
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby lorenith » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:03 pm UTC

Maybe they are being prescribed a version that doesn't/can't actually shoot? The articles aren't really very clear.

I mean, I normally take things at face value, but it just seems kind of wacky to take this so literally, it does seem like it would have applications for hand and joint help as was mentioned.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:08 pm UTC

lorenith wrote:Maybe they are being prescribed a version that doesn't/can't actually shoot? The articles aren't really very clear.

I mean, I normally take things at face value, but it just seems kind of wacky to take this so literally, it does seem like it would have applications for hand and joint help as was mentioned.
? You're saying that they might get health insurance companies/medicare to pay for something that looks like it will work but doesn't? Like getting them to pay for an inhaler that doesn't dispense medicine or a blood tester that doesn't test blood?
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Pa-Patch
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Pa-Patch » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:13 pm UTC

This is just going to get a bunch of nurses and the like shot for no reason. They don't NEED guns. They're not hunting or overthrowing the government (I always thought that was a stupid reason for guns, but hey, it's in your constitution). They're just steadily growing mentally unstable (on average) and have less to lose for shooting someone by accident than most of the population.

Edit to clarify: I get that there are some mentally healthy people with arthritis or hand injuries who could benefit from this, but PRESCRIPTION?

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:24 pm UTC

Pa-Patch wrote:This is just going to get a bunch of nurses and the like shot for no reason. They don't NEED guns. They're not hunting or overthrowing the government (I always thought that was a stupid reason for guns, but hey, it's in your constitution).
Yay! Even more America bashing in a thread that isn't about American gun laws or even its gun culture!
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Pa-Patch
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Pa-Patch » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:33 pm UTC

Gun-bashing, and bashing of those who honestly think that the idea of a bunch of citizens taking their guns to overthrow the government every several years isn't ridiculously outdated.
But that's really not a discussion for this thread, so let's just leave it.

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Gunfingers » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:37 pm UTC

Pa-Patch wrote:I have dismissed your political beliefs as ridiculous and outdated, now don't respond or you'll be off topic.

Erm...fix'd?

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby frezik » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:41 pm UTC

There's a really short barrel on that thing. How do they expect it to be useful at ranges outside of what a taser can handle?
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:44 pm UTC

Gunfingers wrote:
Pa-Patch wrote:I have dismissed your political beliefs as ridiculous and outdated, now don't respond or you'll be off topic.
Erm...fix'd?
Yeah, pretty much. And not even buried in a relatively large post, either.
frezik wrote:There's a really short barrel on that thing. How do they expect it to be useful at ranges outside of what a taser can handle?
I don't think it's supposed to be effective beyond, say, 10 or 20 feet. I think it's simply supposed to be a small self-defense pistol for people who have issues with arthritis, etc.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Pa-Patch
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Pa-Patch » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:46 pm UTC

Well, if you want the last word, feel free to say it, and I won't respond. Call me names if you want.
I was just meaning to point out that I got nothing against America, just against the idea of large portions of the population having guns (in any country) as I can't see a justification that makes up for the dangers is poses (like the elderly shooting people by accident or because they're confused). Criticism against one facet of a nation, or belief held by part of that nation != "______ bashing".
I brought it up in the first place because I was trying to think of reasons the elderly should be given/allowed to have guns in the first place. The 2nd Amendment seems to be the biggest reason.

Kachi
Publicly Posts Private Messages
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:53 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere except SB.

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Kachi » Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:17 pm UTC

Personally I would feel a helluva lot better if these were prescription tasers. In general I encourage people who want a weapon for self defense to use a taser, for the elderly, that much more so.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby EmptySet » Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:46 am UTC

Medicare pays for guns? No wonder America doesn't have universal health care. It'd be more like universal free guns.

Seriously, though, they seem a bit... broad... in their definition of what constitutes a medical device. Does a PC with Windows count as a medical device because it comes with accessibility tools?

User avatar
LeopoldBloom
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:24 am UTC
Location: Waitaks

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby LeopoldBloom » Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:33 am UTC

sorry, stupid post put up accidently whilst still writing one. Sorry again.
Last edited by LeopoldBloom on Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:53 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Nuke the Gay Islamic Whales for Jesus!!!!!

Socal Swimmer
Posts: 944
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:32 am UTC
Location: I'll give you one guess

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Socal Swimmer » Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:38 am UTC

LeopoldBloom wrote:I'm sorry, but what is the justification for this-
I've always assumed there were essentially three arguements for gun use in the U.S-
A) For hunting and other recreational use- Which certainly does not fall under "Medical Care"- if there giving out things designed for entertainment than do I get free xbox games?
B) In case the government gets evil and starts trampling on civil liberties (good job you've got guns to stop them doing that . .Oh, Wait a minute)- And although if this did work it would be laudable it still doesn't count as medical. Whats more, are the elderly really going to be the ones marching on washington? in the wheelchairs?

link


nice third reason.


... oh wait. you didnt put one.


also, fixd your link.
Yawgmoth wrote:Girls who play "hard to get" are the fucking-devil incarnate.


I Am Raven wrote:"I don't wear underwear and like to swing the goods from left to right!"

User avatar
LeopoldBloom
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:24 am UTC
Location: Waitaks

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby LeopoldBloom » Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:52 am UTC

I'm sorry, but what is the justification for this exactly?
I've always assumed there were essentially three arguements for gun use in the U.S-
A) For hunting and other recreational use- Which certainly does not fall under "Medical Care"- if theyr'e giving out things designed for entertainment than do I get free xbox games?
B) In case the government gets evil and starts trampling on civil liberties (good job you've got guns to stop them doing that . . .Oh, Wait a minute)- And although, if this did work it would be laudable it still doesn't count as medical. Whats more, are the elderly really going to be the ones marching on washington? in the wheelchairs?
C) for protection- now quite aside from the various studies showing that owning a gun makes very little difference to how likely you are to be killed or assaulted (in fact, it is generally accepted to make you more at risk)- This seems the most plausable argument as old people are generally the most vunerable to crime, but this STILL IS NOT MEDICAL. Its akin to proscribing guard dogs.

To finalise- A gun Is not a medical device except via extremely tenous logic, the same reasoning could lead to proscribing money as people with less of it are more likely to be sick. Its ridiculous and seems metaphorical of the U.S mindset. You know, invading and toppling the governments of poor countries instead of giving them aid; Handing out free handguns to old people instead of giving them proper medical treatment. Its a fixation on violence.
Nuke the Gay Islamic Whales for Jesus!!!!!

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby psyck0 » Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:08 am UTC

LeopoldBloom wrote:b]C) for protection- now quite aside from the various studies showing that owning a gun makes very little difference to how likely you are to be killed or assaulted (in fact, it is generally accepted to make you more at risk)- This seems the most plausable argument as old people are generally the most vunerable to crime, but this STILL IS NOT MEDICAL. Its akin to proscribing guard dogs. [/b]

To finalise- A gun Is not a medical device except via extremely tenous logic, the same reasoning could lead to proscribing money as people with less of it are more likely to be sick. Its ridiculous and seems metaphorical of the U.S mindset. You know, invading and toppling the governments of poor countries instead of giving them aid; Handing out free handguns to old people instead of giving them proper medical treatment. Its a fixation on violence.


This. 100% this. I'd like to see those studies, though- do they break down their subjects by income, minority status, age, etc? A lot of people who own guns are poor criminals, and so the correlation is between being a poor criminal and having a gun, it's not causality.

That doesn't negate the fact that pulling a gun escalates the situation ridiculously and increases your chances of getting hurt by some absurd factor. No one NEEDS a gun for anything other than hunting, policework, or the military. Maybe one or two other things that didn't immediately pop into my head.

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby frezik » Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:20 am UTC

22/7 wrote:
frezik wrote:There's a really short barrel on that thing. How do they expect it to be useful at ranges outside of what a taser can handle?
I don't think it's supposed to be effective beyond, say, 10 or 20 feet. I think it's simply supposed to be a small self-defense pistol for people who have issues with arthritis, etc.


That's just my point, though. Within 10 feet or so, a taser will do the same job. Possibly better, though there are a lot of variables involved when comparing the stopping power of a small pistol vs a taser.

LeopoldBloom wrote:B) In case the government gets evil and starts trampling on civil liberties (good job you've got guns to stop them doing that . . .Oh, Wait a minute)


The problem here is that the side of the US political isle that advocates guns for protection against the government also happens to be the side with the most authoritarian outlook, largely for historical reasons. So if you're a card carrying member of the NRA, but are otherwise liberal, you have a choice (in theory) to vote for a pro-gun control candidate, or for the candidate that's most likely to make things devolve to the state where you're glad you have a gun.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
lorenith
Posts: 1123
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:35 am UTC
Location: Transient
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby lorenith » Fri Dec 05, 2008 9:33 am UTC

22/7 wrote:
lorenith wrote:Maybe they are being prescribed a version that doesn't/can't actually shoot? The articles aren't really very clear.

I mean, I normally take things at face value, but it just seems kind of wacky to take this so literally, it does seem like it would have applications for hand and joint help as was mentioned.
? You're saying that they might get health insurance companies/medicare to pay for something that looks like it will work but doesn't? Like getting them to pay for an inhaler that doesn't dispense medicine or a blood tester that doesn't test blood?


The point I was making is that the action required to operate the item is what is probably seen as beneficial to patients, it need not actually be able to shoot to do whatever medical purpose they may be seeing it capable of providing. I can't think of any reason they'd go "oh here's a gun for you" but I could imagine them going "here's something that is good for working the muscles, joints and ligaments in your hand and wrist, that happens to be modeled off a kind of gun".

Of course maybe they're just giving elderly people with hand and wrist problems guns for the fun of it, in which case yes it is ridiculous.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Dream » Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:46 pm UTC

lorenith wrote:The point I was making is that the action required to operate the item is what is probably seen as beneficial to patients, it need not actually be able to shoot to do whatever medical purpose they may be seeing it capable of providing. I can't think of any reason they'd go "oh here's a gun for you" but I could imagine them going "here's something that is good for working the muscles, joints and ligaments in your hand and wrist, that happens to be modeled off a kind of gun".

What the fuck? Seriously? This is not a physiotherapy thing. It's a shooting people thing. Giving an elderly infirm person a gun, but making the use of it a physio style work out is, umm, stupider than giving them the gun in the first place. I'm imagining Charlton Heston confronting a home invader with a massive shotgun, and struggling to operate the safety mechanism with his arthritic thumbs. "I have to do this twenty times before breakfast or the nurse will yell at me..."
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:58 pm UTC

Hm.

Well, I, for one, welcome our new geriatric overlords.






...






Oh fuck you, someone had to say it.

User avatar
tehmikey
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:32 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby tehmikey » Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:57 pm UTC

Interesting concept. Sure, if they want a gun, who is to stop them. I am not so keen on medicare covering the cost of a weapon as it lowers the health benefits of one person at the cost of another person's benefits.

I imagine there will be a conceiled handgun liscence requirement for these. Hmm... would medicare cover the cost of the license as well as the cost of the gun?

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Princess Marzipan » Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:13 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Hm.

Well, I, for one, welcome our new geriatric overlords.






...






Oh fuck you, someone had to say it.

I'm glad you did.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby 22/7 » Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:55 pm UTC

EmptySet wrote:Medicare pays for guns? No wonder America doesn't have universal health care. It'd be more like universal free guns.
LeopoldBloom wrote:B) In case the government gets evil and starts trampling on civil liberties (good job you've got guns to stop them doing that . . .Oh, Wait a minute)- And although, if this did work it would be laudable it still doesn't count as medical. Whats more, are the elderly really going to be the ones marching on washington? in the wheelchairs?
Well, so much for non-America bashing, on-topic posts. Let me sum up, in case someone doesn't feel like reading the first 10 or 20 posts of the thread.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BLOWS DONKEY BALLS. WE NON-AMERICANS ARE INFINITELY BETTER THAN YOU STUPID, FUCKING AMERICANS.
frezik wrote:That's just my point, though. Within 10 feet or so, a taser will do the same job. Possibly better, though there are a lot of variables involved when comparing the stopping power of a small pistol vs a taser.
I'm not arguing with you, I'm telling you what it is.
psyck0 wrote:That doesn't negate the fact that pulling a gun escalates the situation ridiculously and increases your chances of getting hurt by some absurd factor. No one NEEDS a gun for anything other than hunting, policework, or the military. Maybe one or two other things that didn't immediately pop into my head.
No one needs freedom of speech either, nor do they need their precious pursuit of happiness, nor right to assemble, etc.

I honestly thought for like two seconds that once the initial America bashing started and stopped, there might actually be some useful discussion in this thread. I'm going to head over to one of the prop 8 threads and start saying how awful California is for being such a bunch of homophobic fucktards. I thought San Francisco was pro-homosexual rights.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby The Reaper » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:16 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BLOWS DONKEY BALLS. WE NON-AMERICANS ARE INFINITELY BETTER THAN YOU STUPID, FUCKING AMERICANS.

You're just angry because your medical system wont give you free guns... :D

I wonder what you have to claim to be able to get this prescribed to you? Will the VA give me an rocket launcher in case of zombie attacks, since I have a bad back? -_- I has ta disabilities... I should gets ta weapons.

On a random note, 'ta' isn't misspelled, according to Firefox... lol.

User avatar
Pa-Patch
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Pa-Patch » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:38 pm UTC

So, are there any actual details on what this being "prescription" actually entails?

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:38 pm UTC

If you read the articles, you'll find out that, yes, there is.

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby psyck0 » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:44 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
psyck0 wrote:That doesn't negate the fact that pulling a gun escalates the situation ridiculously and increases your chances of getting hurt by some absurd factor. No one NEEDS a gun for anything other than hunting, policework, or the military. Maybe one or two other things that didn't immediately pop into my head.
No one needs freedom of speech either, nor do they need their precious pursuit of happiness, nor right to assemble, etc.
My point was that if you don't need it, it shouldn't be covered by medicare. I am obviously defining "need" fairly broadly, for example to cover optional surgeries to remove pain and improve quality of life. I fail to see how a gun would increase quality of life.

User avatar
Pa-Patch
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Pa-Patch » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:49 pm UTC

I meant what means a qualified patient. Can they just give out all of these they want to anyone with arthritis who likes guns?

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Guns For The Elderly

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

If the doctor says so, then yes. It's up to the doctor's professional opinion, if the elderly person is at risk and is unable to otherwise adequately protect themselves with a more conventional device, IE a taser.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests