ObamaCare - Could search your house without a warrant if you are known to buy cigarettes

reply to post by darkbake


This is part of the PPACA (Obamacare) that is enforced by HHS or Health and Human Services. Obamacare was never about healthcare. It was about taxes and more invasive ways to monitor and control citizens and..guns.

Ways to circumvent illegal search and seizure. There are many many things in there many people do not now about.

This is another good thread about the strong arm of the HHS.

Link

The PPACA or Obamacare as it is called created over 159 new government offices and programs. We were told it was to help all Americans get good solid Health care but wrapped inside Death panels and taxes for the middle class is a little known agency that is waiting for the word to act and be read in the case of a National Emergency.

reply to post by darkbake


Stars and Flags for you, darkbake. It's good to hear from others that reflect my own views on this president (lower case intentional) and administration.

You are right in believing this president is doing everything possible to undermine the American Sovereignty. I find it amazing that more don't see it. Sometimes loyalty is truly blind.

I'm just a simple minded truck driver, with limited ability to search and research the absolute truths of everything that's going on. But my common sense has been screaming for several years now, and I see the culmination of plans long laid. Plans that seem to be fast tracked now as the progressives see this as their best chance to, in Obamas words, fundamentally transform America.

I fear for our future, the future of America, and the future of the world as we know it.

reply to post by darkbake


How will the government know?

What about HIPAA rules and regs?
Privacy laws?

The phrase, "Come get some", springs to mind. . .

darkbake
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Wow - sorry Wrabbit I do! That was entirely my mistake. I must have seen the rabbit avatar and read your arguments but spaced it.

I guess I subconsciously consider you and Beezer to be pretty similar especially in the quality and content of your arguments.

edit on 27-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

You flatter me.

Wrabbit is far more astute.

Read through the rest of the thread and replies.

As for calling this "false".

*ahem*

TSA is just there to make flying safer.
Patriot Act is put into place to make us "safer".
DHS just want's you secure.

So for the nay-sayers here, lets see you give a big shout-out for these programs!

Right?

Asktheanimals
Give me my smokes or give me death!
Oh wait, I get both at once!

I can believe this, the Obama administration knows no Constitutional bounds. They will lie, cheat, steal, murder, whatever it takes to fulfill their agenda. Popping in to people's homes for cig searches would be a small step for these authoritarians.
I believe you Darkbake, this wouldn't surprise me in the least.
S&F

I'll see your PallMall Henry and raise you a Moses:
"From my cold nicotine-stained fingers!"
I respectfully submit the most unhealthy behavior aany American can engage in is filling out a 1040.
There --- THAT oughta get me redlisted.... too late.

Edit:: this is starting to sound more all the time to my allegedly compromised sensibilities like, "We'll keep you healthy if it kills you!" HEFF! Help me, I'm surrounded by cigaNazis with unlimited financing! Circle the snackwagons, the suckers'll never take us alive. Besides nothing as resurfaced as my apartment parking lot will ever get cancer: nothing can get in my lungs anymore, including oxygen.
Probably why I act like this on Saturdays. Thumbs.

reply to post by darkbake


Power overwhelming...

What's the point of "rights" anymore...? People still laugh at me when I say America is a police state. Who's laughing now?

-SAP-

reply to post by darkbake


Way to go sensationalism, posting on a topic without any idea what you're posting about...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


"Our ruling

Bloggers passed around a claim last week that a provision of the new health care law will allow 'forced' home inspections by government agents.

But the program they pointed to provides grants for voluntary help to at-risk families from trained staff like nurses and social workers.

What bloggers describe would be an egregious abuse of the law — not what’s allowed by it. We rate the claim Pants on Fire."

Source: PolitiFact

reply to post by darkbake


i'd say this is absolutely unbelievable...but sadly, i can buy this happening...and i can buy it increasing in frequency with time....

Until cigarettes are illegal, they have no business searching people's houses for them...and they certainly won't be coming in to MY home...

no judge would issue a warrant to search a home for a legal object....how do they get away with this crap? do they completely depend on the ignorance of the people for this one?

DerbyGawker
reply to post by darkbake

 

Way to go sensationalism, posting on a topic without any idea what you're posting about...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


"Our ruling

Bloggers passed around a claim last week that a provision of the new health care law will allow 'forced' home inspections by government agents.

But the program they pointed to provides grants for voluntary help to at-risk families from trained staff like nurses and social workers.

What bloggers describe would be an egregious abuse of the law — not what’s allowed by it. We rate the claim Pants on Fire."

Source: PolitiFact< br />

what's your angle here, man?

i noticed you JUST registered, and you're defending this, and you post a "it's for the children" article, without mentioning the indefensible bit about inspecting homes with tobacco users...it says nothing about children in that bit...

so let's ask you this: do you think the idea of them coming to inspect the home of a smoker, where no children are present, is something that ought to be permitted?

reply to post by YodHeVauHe


Nazi references aside...did you notice how the names of all these acts all SOUND so innocent, and potentially beneficial?

i mean, who, in america comes out against something called the patriot act? or the national defense authorization act?....it sounds like a good thing...to protect us..

they need to start calling these things what they actually are....if they did, maybe more citizens would be prompted to look at them, and then maybe more people would see that they're not good, and speak out against them..

even obamacare has a nice-sounding name..."patient protection" "affordable healthcare"..i mean, that sounds downright awesome...but in reality, it neither protects patients, nor makes healthcare affordable...and there's nothing in the name about the mandatory purchase of a product from a private company, with the penalty of government robbery, if you fail to buy the product...

it's really the same as if the federal government told everyone they were required to buy an iPhone, and that the penalty for NOT buying an iPhone, was that the government was just going to take the money from you anyway. how in the HELL can ANYONE believe this BS is actually legal? i mean, does it rain chocolate milk in their version of reality? this is so far out of order.....how? i mean, how in the hell does this happen?

reply to post by darkbake


Considering it won't be implemented until 2018 and he won't be President then, I don't think you have too much to worry about. I Buy cigarettes and worry they are on my debit card. Maybe my health care provider has a way to get ahold of my purchase history and find this out. Of course they do. So I always pay cash for cigarettes and liquor.

reply to post by WormwoodSquirm


dude, it's not "no fee healthcare for all"

it's buying insurance coverage from the same private companies, only now, it has a big fat government "approved" stamp on it, accompanied by a big fat government subsidy...and it's more expensive than it is now..

and if you don't buy this product from a private corporation, that you can''t afford, the IRS swoops in, and saddles you with a big fat tax penalty...it's institutionalized extortion and robbery, under color of law....

fluoride makes you dumb...being dumb, is what makes people believe that obamacare is a good thing..

reply to post by Daedalus


Emphesizing "just" suggests you have a paranoid view of my intent. I'm a former member who quit some 3 years ago because all the schizophrenics came out of the wood works.

My only angle was to point out the ridiculousness of essentially 're-tweeting' trash journalism based upon NOTHING. So there is an article which discusses the inception and intent behind the viral ignorance.

Let me ask you this: Does changing the conditions of the proposed legislation and its authority into a radical fear-mongering question have anything to do with anything?

In reply to your question, of course not. But they're called administrative warrants, they are legal and occur all the time, especially to enforce code compliance. But to ask such a generic question not only ignores the complexities of all possible scenarios in which it *could* be prudent to perform a forced inspection.

You present a very generic scenario that in no way has anything to do with the language of the law.

It would do people some good to actually read it before they form questions regarding it.

Loveaduck
reply to post by darkbake

 

Considering it won't be implemented until 2018 and he won't be President then, I don't think you have too much to worry about. I Buy cigarettes and worry they are on my debit card. Maybe my health care provider has a way to get ahold of my purchase history and find this out. Of course they do. So I always pay cash for cigarettes and liquor.

They have got a big fat industrial complex, and cant go to war because Russia has chess mated them, of course they will now turn on the enemy within, its how the interested parties justify there paychecks. Remember "Reefer madness", it came from one Government department that was about to downsized in the thirties. Prohibition had been called off by the "do gooders", so something else had to be manufactured. It's a lot easier to do this than have to think up something that actually works.

iwilliam
Don't take this the wrong way, OP, but I have extreme difficulty believing this. It seems somewhat alarmist, and I can't help but feel like you didn't get the whole story from your friend of a friend.

I did read the link to the Ben Swann site, and it did read like a 1984-style conspiracy thriller, but I can't help but wonder what they're basing their info on.


I really can't see them violating the 4th amendment. The only way I can almost seem them maybe getting away with it, is if there is something in "obamacare" stating that if you accept the service, you have to agree to waive privacy, etc etc. Which sounds like it's right on the border of illegal, anyway, as that would be coercion.


What I will say is that if this is true, there is almost no faster way for them to cause mass protests (that would make occupy look like a joke) and possibly violent revolution. No joke. This would go over worse than forced disarmament, IMHO. One of the few things that could turn me into an "activist" pretty quick, that's for sure....

see, this raises an very interesting condition to light....

ok, so let's say, for a moment, that the inspections are voluntary, and that they cover all the things listed....

let's also say that they are only voluntary insofar as to mean that accepting the obamacare coverage is your opting in, and agreeing to the inspections....

let's also say that you cannot opt out, and still accept coverage.

now, you have a catch 22....if you accept the coverage, you agree to the violation of privacy, but avoid the IRS fine...if you refuse to buy the product, you maintain your right to privacy, but are penalized for that, by way of the IRS fine.....

so then, it becomes true that you can only have as much privacy as you can buy...

not sure if this is the case, but if it is, then it absolutely qualifies as coercion....by itself, obamacare qualifies as extortion and robbery...which, of course, coercion are components of..

reply to post by anonentity


Then as now, Reefer Madness is inspired by alcohol and tobacco industries who do not want to see a dent in their profits. I think the illness brought on by the pair of those makes an awful lot of money for people in the medical and insurance fields too. Those industries do not want to see their sick bodies with their health coverage go away. And the prisons...when you think about it, these are all powerful lobbies working overtime to prevent something that actually has health benefits from becoming legal. I do not believe any government agents will be able to search your premises on non-terrorist related charges, Obama care or no.

Flatfish
Oh please! How can you even state that you have "taxation without representation" in the same sentence that ends with "our entire legislative branch?" Oxymoron anyone?

The only way you could possibly have no representation would be if you made the conscious choice not to vote.

no, not really...

the legislative branch exists, but it doesn't really represent the will of the people anymore...it represents the interest of the greedy ciminals that fill the seats...

if it were allowed, i'd see that every member of the house, senate, and congress had plaques in front of their seats with the logo of every company funding them...it'd look like NASCAR...

The real problem here is that this is a democratic republic

the fact that you don't even know what kind of government you have, makes me question EVERYTHING you say..

this is not a democratic republic...it is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.....there IS a difference.

Fear mongering and the propagation of lies, like the one demonstrated in this thread's title & OP, are nothing more than a pathetic attempt to convince the ignorant that they should be afraid of the A.C.A.

why SHOULDN'T we be concerned, worried, or afraid of the ACA?

what about it is good?