With the passage of the new Firearm Concealed Carry Act, Illinois “qualified examiners” — physicians, clinical psychologists, school  administrators, law enforcement official and others  – are now required to report individuals who they believe pose a clear and present danger” to themselves or others.

And reportable behavior does not have to involve firearms.

Under the FCCA, these “mandated reporters” are to notify the state within 24 hours of anyone who communicates a serious threat of physical violence against a reasonably identifiable victim. Or anyone who poses a clear and imminent risk of serious physical injury to himself, herself or another person. For more on this, click here to access the Department of Human Services’ Mental Health Reporting System website.

Reportable instances include threatening behaviors – either physical or verbal.  This includes violent, suicidal or assaultive threats, actions or other behavior, as determined solely by a mandated reporter.

Reported individuals can include an individual who comes into an emergency room, and after being observed for a time, leaves against medical advice without being admitted.

In other words, if you check into a hospital E.R., sit in the waiting room for a while and feel better, then decide that you feel well enough to go home to minimize damage to your family’s finances and leave, you may have problems.  An over-eager “qualified reporter” could possibly have you called into the Department of Human Services as a “danger to yourself.” And in a short period of time, your firearm ownership rights could be revoked.

Think this is far-fetched? Read for yourself the suggested guidelines for qualified examiners.

An individual after being observed for a time leaves against medical advice without being admitted. Since the individual was not admitted there is nothing for the facility to report. However the licensed professional MAY NEED TO report if the patient presented as a “clear and present” danger.

We at Guns Save Life are very concerned with the potential for abuse in this system. As it stands right now, once reported, an individual would be “guilty until proven innocent” and lose his or her civil rights without a court hearing or due process. A wrongfully accused individual would only be able to restore their civil rights after great expense and difficulty, if at all.

Gun owners should be very circumspect about any comments made to any of these mandated reporters. The doctor-patient privilege is a thing of the past in Illinois under this new law. Don’t think for a minute that you can speak in confidence with medical or mental health professionals. They are now mandated to report a wide range of topics to the Department of Human Services within 24 hours, any one of which could leave you stripped of your gun rights.

In the meantime, remember: Loose lips sink ships – and possibly your gun rights.


15 thoughts on “IMPORTANT: New Illinois mental health reporting rules… Loose lips can cost your gun rights”
  1. Making the progressive tolerant list for re-education of them assigning your rights is collected from “many” lists. A routine visit to your family doctor is a open minefield of does “trust me ” apply to this conversation ?

  2. And remember that many (the majority?) of people in these ‘may or must report’ positions are of a “liberal persuasion”, are anti 2nd amendment, and don’t see the world as most realists do.

  3. Inimical behavior was used to take guns in Nazi Germany and has been used in a limited way in Illinois in the past by Cops that don’t like people questioning their authority.
    Now inimical behavior will be used as a police state tool to disarm people with a back-bone.

    I could see this coming for years it was just a matter of time.
    Now you know why I dislike the FOID card!

  4. I have a question why did the nra and the isra allow this to be part of the cc bill?
    We have horribly unqualified people making a health determination they have NO right to make

    1. Not having the votes to stop it is one thing but that’s a COP OUT when the ACTUALITY is that the ISRA came out IN SUPPORT of this law and others straightforwardly REFUSED to OPPOSE IT.

      John, your answer here demonstrates intellectual dishonestly that matches today’s politicians. A honest questioned was asked there and a DISHONEST answer was offered in return. You do not get to avoid responsibility NOW. You WANTED thus garbage and you got it. So LIVE WITH IT!

      You didn’t have the COURAGE to OPPOSE IT – the lure of the training money was too great. Coveting the “license” at any cost was too. Now you get to OWN what you did!

  5. I’m a physician. Most (but not all) of the docs and nurses I know do not like these reporting requirements and view them as a violation of the doctor-patient relationship.

    John is right, be very careful what you say in a medical or mental health setting.

  6. Please … understand what you’re talking about before you post incorrect information.

    You wrote:

    “Reported individuals can include an individual who comes into an emergency room, and after being observed for a time, leaves against medical advice without being admitted. In other words, if you check into a hospital E.R., sit in the waiting room for a while and feel better, then decide that you don’t want to pay for E.R. charges and leave, you may have problems.”

    This is WRONG.

    If a patient is admitted, it means that the patient is to remain in the hospital for a longer period of time than simply seeing the doctor in the ER and being on his/her way. It often involves moving out of the ER into another section of the hospital. The patient is allowed to refuse the doctor’s suggestion, and hence this would be leaving against medical advice (AMA).

    In other words, if a patient left “against medical advice,” that would mean that the patient WAS SEEN BY A DOCTOR, and then the doctor suggested that he remain for further observation and/or treatment, and the patient declined to accept the doctor’s advice. It does NOT MEAN the patient simply left the waiting room and was never seen by the doctor. You can’t leave “against medical advice” if you haven’t received medical advice.

    All of that said, I agree that these suggested guidelines are not good. But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don’t post incorrect information when you report something like this.

    1. Chip, we wrote “checked in” to an ER, you are effectively admitted according to new rules at the local Carle and possibly Presence hospital as well.

      I think we’re arguing minutiae here. The bottom line here is that there’s WAY too much authority that’s been given to people who bear zero liability for calling that hotline.


  7. I will not go down without a fight….call me crazy if you want…better have some big balls if you want to take away what is rightfully and Constitutionaly mine….imho

  8. This is a pandora’s box. unqualified people determining our rights but remember this is more than gun rights you can lose your drivers license over this as well. That could mean NO job to support your family

Comments are closed.