- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Neither of which is relevant to this case about doctors asking about guns in the home.
That may be the case, but less it's a medical emergency I think a private practicioner can choose to see or not see anyone he wants for whatever reason he wants.
Anti-2nd amendment loons work with baby steps.It is not far fetched to see them using this as a back door firearms registration. They already trying to start a back door DNA database with your baby's dna. Why not a back door firearms registry?
The government has your baby's DNA - CNN
Once it becomes commonplace for "doctors" to ask about unrelated firearms, the next steps will be:
Recording the answers. These will naturally be digitized and stored electronically.
Then:
Correlating the answers with state firearm registration databases.
Then:
arresting people with unregistered firearms.
Finally:
Confiscation.
Don't believe the Mayor?
Seat belts were optional.
Seat belts became mandatory equipment.
Wearing seat belts became a matter for start-interlocks, and later, alarms.
Wearing seat belts became MANDATORY for all states seeking federal hgihway funds, subject to possible tickets by state tax collectors when stopped for other reasons. (These tax collectors are called "cops" in the vernacular of the peasantry.)
Unconstitutional seatbelt check roadblocks were implemented. Another loss of freedom.
Finally, not wearing a seatbelt has become in itself, a ticketable offense for which any tax collector can stop a vehicle and submit a tax bill.
Now, now, Duece. That's a mighty broad brush you're using to paint with there. I expected better from you. :2razz:
Wouldn't that be in violation of their oath that they take? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of being a doctor to begin wtih - if someone doesn't actually want to help people then why bother going through med school to learn how ot help people.
the only thing that's my dr's business is my health and health related issues - I don't own a firearm now, but when I did it still wasn't their business. Just the same as it's not their concern that I read books late at night or slouch while i sit at the computer.
Neither of which is relevant to this case about doctors asking about guns in the home.
Listing reasons doesn't make them legitimate.
True. But not being able to refute them DOES. And since you can't, they are.
Next.
That's your personal opinion. There is no relationship between a gun and a physical. You just want to nosey into everyone life, that's all it is. And you want to push an agenda. I don't have to refute it, it's plainly obvious to any reasonable person, and you have a conflict of interest in the matter.
instead of them saying "do you have any firearms in the house? yes? in that case you should follow these safety guidelines..."
they could say "if you have any firearms in the house, you should follow these safety guidelines...."
simple. problem solved.
this is hardly a bad thing.
"We're not against guns, per se. What we're concerned about is proper storage and handling of firearms," said Louis St. Petery, MD, executive vice president of the Florida chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The measure is partly a reaction to American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines encouraging physicians to talk to parents about protecting children from preventable accidents. This includes the use of booster seats in cars, swimming pool safety and proper gun storage.
Dr. Sege helped develop the AAP's Connected Kids clinical guide, which advises physicians to begin talking about safe gun storage to parents of 6- to 9-month-old children. The AAP also advises parents with guns to store them unloaded and locked, with a separate lock on the trigger.
amednews: Physicians, gun owners tangle over Florida 'don't ask' gun bill :: Jan. 31, 2011
You are making a supposition that the only reason why a physician would ask about gun ownership is to push an agenda. That is absurd for two reasons:
1) It assumes that all doctors who ask about guns are doing so solely because they are anti-gun... a pretty ridiculous and paranoid position
2) It fails to accept the exceptions, such as what I presented... a suicidal patient, with a physician trying to determine if that patient has means to kill themselves.
This is why your position is absurd. You failed to recognize that the two above positions make it invalid.
And yeah, you do have to refute it. You claim I'm wrong. Prove it. If not, then you have nothing.
This would be better, but I still fail to see the strict healthcare relationship.
Should they also make sure your oil change mileage is ok and check the tire pressure? Wouldn't want an auto 'accident'!
It's a virtually unanimous opinion so far.
You don't see how a mishandled or poorly stored gun in the house could be a healthcare issue.
Really.
Should they be legally prohibited from asking a question? Should we also ban them from legally asking how your day is going? It's none of their business? How about asking about a recent sports game? What if I don't like the same team!? *wrings hands*
Just as you claimed I'm wrong. I don't have to explain common sense to you, otherwise we couldn't even have a basic conversation because then I'd have to prove that even sources are proven, and sources about sources are proven. Some things are understood. The AMA is against gun ownership, that's all that matters here.
Thought You Should Know - Boundary Violation: Gun Politics in the Doctor’s OfficeThe AAP, ACP, and AMA are members of the Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan (HELP) Network, based in Chicago. HELP is an exclusive advocacy group dedicated to banning guns. Physicians who disagree with HELP’s anti-gun agenda are barred from attending HELP’s conferences, a policy unthinkable in any scientific organization. HELP’s founder and leader Dr. Katherine Christoffel has compared guns to viruses that must be eradicated. (9) The group’s militant advocacy has no place for differing viewpoints on firearms, and apparently neither do the medical organizations which have signed on as HELP members.
In fact, the AAP has adopted its "gun safety instruction" patient materials from the gun-ban lobby Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI). The AAP and Handgun Control, Inc.’s informational wing the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence advise families in their STOP pamphlet, "The safest thing is to not have a gun in your home, especially not a handgun." (10) And a survey of pediatricians showed 76% supported a ban on handguns. (11) Patients who seek objective advice on firearm safety should not look to pediatricians as a group. And any doctor should know that patient counseling based on these materials is politics, not medicine.
Perhaps the most revealing aspect of organized medicine’s anti-gun bias is its persistent refusal to address the criminology literature on guns. For over twenty years, criminologists have studied firearms, their use and misuse, their risks and benefits. Especially in the last two years prominent researchers have found that firearm ownership is not the scourge that medical activists have claimed it to be. The best and latest research finds that private gun ownership by responsible citizens not only is safe, but protects the individual as well as his community from violent crime. (12)
Appeared originally in the Medical Sentinel of the
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons,
March/April 1999, pp. 60-61
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?