Washington I-1639 Registry & HIPPA - Legal Beagle Question

[Dwesson]

My understanding is that, prior to I-1639 a WA resident purchasing a pistol allowed a 1 time release of their otherwise confidential health information, but that the changes in I-1639 made it persist into perpetuity and granted the state whatever frequency of inquiries they wanted.

Also I believe they added almost all semi-auto rifles subject to this waiver and added them to the "registry" that existed prior just for pistols in WA state.

My question for anyone that may have the legal expertise or may know.

1. If I move out of state after previously having signed this waiver, can you petition the state to nullify it? It would seem if you are no longer a WA state resident, the state does not have the authority to continually check your mental health status into perpetuity with whatever frequency it wants.
2. If I move out of state can I petition the state to remove pistols from the WA state Pistol Database that were purchased PRIOR to I-1639 AND/OR pistols/semi-auto rifles purchased AFTER I-1639?

I halted firearm purchases prior to I-1639 as I felt these changes among others were a drastic overreach, I also sped up some purchases, but didn't get everything on my list. I won't spend my whole life in this state and at some point will move. However, if I am basically signing up for a permanent cataloging of all future purchases by this state's licensing department and signing up for a violation of my health information forever, on whatever whim the state feels like checking it, I can wait to make these purchases.

Thanks for your time.

Read More

 

[awshoot]

That's an interesting question. I've read over RCW 9.41 a lot but haven't found anything in it about getting out of the database. One way to find out would be to move out of state, find an attorney here, and file some sort of request with the courts. It would be hellish expensive of course, but maybe some of the gun rights orgs would be interested.

 

[Sporting Systems]

There is absolutely no way to remove yourself from the database, The law will not even allow the DOL to verify if you're alive, it will just keep checking on you forever, or until the law is amended.

 

[ActionHero1980]

I would like a definitive answer as to whether or not those of us who have NOT purchased anything after 1639 will be subject to the annual checks and hippa waiver.

I dont see how they can consider pre 1639 purchase signatures lifetime hippa waivers. That is not what we where agreeing to at the time

 

[Diamondback]

This is why I only buy receivers... for now, anyway. Then when they change that I'll switch to 80%'s...

#SuckAGiantUlceratedDickBob

 

[Dwesson]

I would like a definitive answer as to whether or not those of us who have NOT purchased anything after 1639 will be subject to the annual checks and hippa waiver.

I dont see how they can consider pre 1639 purchase signatures lifetime hippa waivers. That is not what we where agreeing to at the time

I don't think there was anything in the law about retroactively going back and doing it but that's not enough to stop the state.

The only assurance you have is that they are incompetent, but you can think it would be trivial over time between electronic medical records and the database being digitized they could start to automate a check and potentially start running checks on everyone in the database at whatever frequency they want.

 

[Dwesson]

There is absolutely no way to remove yourself from the database, The law will not even allow the DOL to verify if you're alive, it will just keep checking on you forever, or until the law is amended.

Thank you for the clarification.

I am not a lawyer but I feel like if someone who's no longer a WA resident had their health care information/HIPPA Privacy violated they would have standing to bring a lawsuit.

I believe the same would be true for someone who no longer owned a firearm that they had to sign the waiver to purchase.

 

[arakboss]

Thank you for the clarification.

I am not a lawyer but I feel like if someone who's no longer a WA resident had their health care information/HIPPA Privacy violated they would have standing to bring a lawsuit.

I believe the same would be true for someone who no longer owned a firearm that they had to sign the waiver to purchase.

If a person feels they have a case here, I would encourage them to pursue it. They would probably have to prove damages in some form. How can you prove they are accessing your health records? Is there a trail they leave behind showing that they accessed your files? Do they only check them when they believe they have cause?

It would be great to see this in Federal Court and see the State lose.

 

[awshoot]

If a person feels they have a case here, I would encourage them to pursue it. They would probably have to prove damages in some form. How can you prove they are accessing your health records? Is there a trail they leave behind showing that they accessed your files? Do they only check them when they believe they have cause?

It would be great to see this in Federal Court and see the State lose.

He doesn't necesarily need to seek damages (though the whole thing with NY City changing its law in a brazen attempt to moot the case at SCOTUS would have been undone by asking for damages) -- he could ask for a court order removing his name and records from the database. If he wins, the state either complies or appeals. If he loses, he appeals.

 

[American123]

I think we can be 'frank' here, and say, when the government has a database, even if you could petition to "be off" the database, you'd really never be off it...

 

[Diamondback]

I think we can be 'frank' here, and say, when the government has a database, even if you could petition to "be off" the database, you'd really never be off it...

Ask Canadians how their long-gun registry "shutdown" worked for them...

 

[American123]

Ask Canadians how their long-gun registry "shutdown" worked for them...

Don't think I need to bother, I'm familiar with 20th century history regarding governments and firearm registries.

 

[quneur]

I can see a senario where a person can get into trouble with I-1639. If a person went to a healthcare provider for mental issues ( like depression ) in WA in the past, the information is kept by the provider.

The person leaves the state then purchase a firearm in their new state. The person returns later and gets stopped by authorities for some reason, like returning to hunt (with an out of state license) or participating in a shooting competition. They run a check and somehow the information came out; you're not allowed to own a firearm in the state even though you were allowed to purchase/own in your home state.

 

[Dwesson]

I think we can be 'frank' here, and say, when the government has a database, even if you could petition to "be off" the database, you'd really never be off it...

Well I know you can remove firearms from the NFA as either destroyed or no longer subject to it (reverting a SBR for example).

Whether this removes the record entirely or they still have it in their and it's amended to show its no longer active, I do not know.

 

[American123]

Well I know you can remove firearms from the NFA as either destroyed or no longer subject to it (reverting a SBR for example).

Whether this removes the record entirely or they still have it in their and it's amended to show its no longer active, I do not know.

I think you know, when has the government wanted to have less information about its people.

 

[Sporting Systems]

The DOL is no where sophisticated enough, not do they have funding or systems to actually do anything at this point. It's coming and we are working on a challenge in federal court over the registry aspect of this. The NRA and SAF are both helping examine the venue and mechanism for this suit. Our 1639 lawsuit in Federal court is moving fast at this point, going to be a fun ride. My deposition with the AG's office is Wednesday.

 

[762pilot]

Thank you Dwesson for this thread! This is exactly what I have been trying to determine and better understand. From my perspective, it is simply becoming too slippery a slope and like you I've decided against future purchases, at least for the time being. The other item affected by this is renewal of CCW permit. I'm having a tough time deciding if I'll cave at that point, but like many are saying here once you're on the list why would the state help you get off it? Certainly there is a push to have this information on everyone, no matter where we go. So if the goal is to get to a more free state, which many of us dream of...how long do we have?

 

[quneur]

Thank you Dwesson for this thread! This is exactly what I have been trying to determine and better understand. From my perspective, it is simply becoming too slippery a slope and like you I've decided against future purchases, at least for the time being. The other item affected by this is renewal of CCW permit. I'm having a tough time deciding if I'll cave at that point, but like many are saying here once you're on the list why would the state help you get off it? Certainly there is a push to have this information on everyone, no matter where we go. So if the goal is to get to a more free state, which many of us dream of...low long do we have?

I can't tell you what to do but this attitude is exactly what these anti-gun laws was written for. Sometimes I think it would be better if all these laws came down at once. More people would see how ridiculous over-bearing these laws are but importantly, many would get angry. By slowly chipping away at gun-rights, gun advocates are likely to get a defeatist attitude instead of righteous indignation.

< RANT >
These anti-gun groups only exist for funding from very wealthy donors. A lot of these laws are advertising - make emotional ads, the more people it affects, the more these wealthy donors will virtue signal donations. Ever wonder why these Ads are in the same format?

"Hi, my name is ______, I've been a police officer for XX years,"
<background: its night with ambulance with lights flashing and/with police placing police tape.>
"Everyday another child is effected by gun violence..."

The "if it saves only one child" argument is the only one they can make because they know they lost the statics/adjective argument. I suspect if there was wealthy donors on the gun-rights side, many of the same people will switch ideology.
<RANT OVER>

I would, as funds allow, strengthen what I own now (buying ammo, mags, reloading components, etc.) and join gun rights organizations.

 

[762pilot]

I can't tell you what to do but this attitude is exactly what these anti-gun laws was written for. Sometimes I think it would be better if all these laws came down at once. More people would see how ridiculous over-bearing these laws are but importantly, many would get angry. By slowly chipping away at gun-rights, gun advocates are likely to get a defeatist attitude instead of righteous indignation.

< RANT >
These anti-gun groups only exist for funding from very wealthy donors. A lot of these laws are advertising - make emotional ads, the more people it affects, the more these wealthy donors will virtue signal donations. Ever wonder why these Ads are in the same format?

"Hi, my name is ______, I've been a police officer for XX years,"
<background: its night with ambulance with lights flashing and/with police placing police tape.>
"Everyday another child is effected by gun violence..."

The "if it saves only one child" argument is the only one they can make because they know they lost the statics/adjective argument. I suspect if there was wealthy donors on the gun-rights side, many of the same people will switch ideology.
<RANT OVER>

I would, as funds allow, strengthen what I own now (buying ammo, mags, reloading components, etc.) and join gun rights organizations.

You see my comment and judge me with a defeatist attitude? Really? I'll gain wisdom and understand the implications of my decisions against a written law, then act according to my God given right to live free. Beyond that you'll have to read between the lines.

 

[quneur]

Firstly, I apologize if I offended. I can only go off what is written.

The affects of these laws hits harder than people may think not the least of which are when people decide not or hold off on purchasing goods. I routinely check my FFL's Armlist ads and I've notice he's hardly moving any MSRs except as parts. I'm afraid many LGS's will not be there for too long.