The Florida "Gag Rule" for Doctors and Guns

An acquaintence of mine forwarded me a link to this recent article in the New York Times regarding the recently passed legislation in Florida that prohibits doctors from asking patients whether they own firearms. I got such a good laugh out of it, I thought I'd share my reaction:

Ha! I almost bust a gut reading that article. The author gets off on the wrong foot by asking about seat belts. My answer? No, I don't use 'em because I ride a motorcycle. So screw you, you nannie!

And he then pretends that the gangbangers he's examining are going to listen to his counseling and lock their Loricins safely away. Following that line of thought, doctors should most certainly be locked away because they cause 20 times more deaths than guns do. (Physician, heal thyself!) Of course, to do so would ignore the benefit that doctors, and firearms, provide to society. But, that's the typical myopia of hoplophobes.

The cherry on top of the article, though, is when he trots out the phenomenally lame worry that he might be sued for malpractice if he doesn't advise his patients on "proper" gun handling. Oh, really? Show me one example, anytime, anywhere, where a physician has even been sued on these grounds, let alone finally found liable. I can't believe that this doctor's ego is so enormous that he's willing to take responsibility for anything that happens to his patients if he hasn't specifically counseled them on its dangers.

To any doctors out there who think they're qualified to tell me how to properly store or use a gun, let's compare certifications and degrees sometime. I think you'll find yourself outgunned, if you'll pardon the expression. Stick to what you're trained in, Doc, and I'll do the same.

Comments

[Nec Quinsrule]

Hi, did you even read the article?
Firstly I don't know where you got the idea that the author was trying to influence "gangbangers". That's clearly not his aim at all. I think the advice he's hoping to offer is for the gun owners involved in the 613 accidental gun deaths per year (2007 - lastest stat I could find). Or maybe for the parents of the 1,520 0-17 year olds who died in 2007 (again sorry its an old stat). And there are 5 times as many children injured every year as are killed.

I do agree that HIS COLLEAGUES (not his) concern about being sued seems a little farfetched as i cant imagine anyone being held responsible for someone else's mistake (especially when a new law prevents his intervention). But his point still stands that an important part of being a doctor is prevention. The idea of washing your hands hadn't been thought of until the 19th century and i bet it took doctors at the time a fair amount of effort to convince your every day man that there were tiny harmfull living creatures covering his skin - But it doesn't mean its not true. Just like keeping your rounds separate from your gun helps prevent your curious 5 year old from blowing his foot off.

I don't know this for a fact, but i imagine if he was previously advising on gun safety and from a stand point of authority then he probably was qualified to do so. Weither he's more or less qualified than you to advise is irrelevant - you're probably not his target audience in the first place and you can still choose to ignore his advice. However i think it is your ego that is "enormous" to think that these measures are put in place solely for your benefit. If everyone was as qualified as you claim to be there probably wouldn't be 15 hundred dead kids a year. But, alas, there are - and its probably because there are some morons out there who hadn't thought to leave the safety on, or put the gun in a top draw. Can you explain to me why its a good idea for a doctor to be legally prevented from talking to parents about this??? i'd sit through it every time i went to the doctors, safe in the knowledge that it might give a child the rest of their life - small price to pay eh???

Now i wont presume to know you, but on the subject of your ego and your comment on wearing a safety belt - do you really think a doctor shouldn't mention it to anyone because you ride a motorcycle. Congratulations, you're part of a minority!!! Doctors all over the US probably have more than the sole intention of helping you alone, so get over yourself when someone who's trained for 7 years to help people gives you some general advise.

I bet you wear a helmet anyway, or have a chain guard, or mirrors or any number of safety devices put in place to reduce the chances of you dying.

"About 35,000 people die in motor vehicle crashes each year (in the US i assume this means), and nearly half of those fatalities could have been prevented if the victims had worn seat belts, according to data published by James Madison University. From 1975 to 2007, more than 240,000 passengers who were in car crashes would have died if they hadn't been wearing seat belts, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. More than 15,000 lives were saved by seat-belt use in 2007 alone."

In India there are 14 road deaths an hour, and 99 percent of accidents are due to drink driving in rural areas according to http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,5519345,00.html
Now that's probably because it's not common knowledge as to how dangerous it is - just like it wasn't in this country a few decades ago. Do you know what changes public opinion - The advise of health professionals and the spread of information. I imagine rural india doesn't have a great flow of information of that kind - just like america won't if you keep instating laws to prevent people from giving simple and seemingly obvious advice like dont let your inquisitive kid know where you keep your gun or don't drive when blind drunk.

Now i imagine you've given up reading this as it wasn't my intention to write more than a few sentences. If not comment back.

Greg (from a country with 1/44th of the gun deaths of USA per capita)

[sobiloff]

Greg, thanks for the long reply and sorry to be slow in responding. My grumpy reaction to the article is because it comes down to the idea that people don't need more nannies, especially those that come after our 2nd Amendment rights. The AMA is very anti-gun and has frequently tried to use the language of disease to describe firearms in demented attempt to restrict or ban them.

The stats you cite include all uses of guns, which (sadly) means that over half of those deaths were by suicide, while another significant portion were deaths by law enforcement officers in the course of their duties. http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-is-atf-promoting-brady-campaign.html Furthermore, it ignores the 1-3 million beneficial defensive uses of guns.

If you want to discount the above one can argue that doctors themselves are far more dangerous than gun owners, yet I don't see doctors lecturing their patients that the doctor himself is dangerous and should be avoided. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=406051

It's not a doctor's job to lecture his patients about every possible danger, especially when those risks arise from the exercise of free will and liberty.