Gun control data

IJ · Post by IJ » Tue Feb 11, 2003 6:40 pm

Hey all... during a discussion on partner violence, gun control came up and as is common in the medical community, people seemed to think that guns are inherently evil and dangerous and that we'd be safer if they were legally banned. I raised some counterpoints and several residents came up to me afterwards looking for more info, and I was wondering if there's been a compilation of the data on murder and suicide that's well studied / full of citations, such as the stuff that Panther puts on the forums when the need arises. It'd be a handy thing in the article section. Can that be done, has that been done? If not can anyone remember relevant threads that I can pull from for info for these people? They've been referred to Lott's work already.

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:27 pm

Hello Ian. The following link will take you to the NRA research site. Lots of info to wade through.

http://www.nraila.org/library.asp

Have fun.

Rich

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:44 pm

Ian: Here is a bit of info dealing with suicide...

http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?Fo ... ail&ID=117

Rich

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 12:16 am

I've actually spent a lot of time going to sources other than the NRA, simply because many people automatically think that the NRA isn't truthful about guns. (Actually, they are and those in Washington have even given the NRA awards for having the most accurate data in their lobbying efforts. Regardless... )

Personally, I have a lot of friends who collect this data, reports, analysis, etc. and I used to have over a gig of that data on my hard-drive. I've archived a lot of stuff just for space.

There are other sources to look at... I'll see what I can come up with for you.

And Thanks for taking the side of "evil people are evil, not inanimate objects."

IJ · Post by IJ » Fri Feb 14, 2003 2:07 pm

Thanks guys--agree with Panther that a link to NRA may be helpful for those who can read it with an open mind, but then there's an antigun culture in medicine which I'm becoming more aware of. I sometimes hear people mention that they screen for whether there's a gun in the home much as I ask if people smoke or whether they wear seatbelts. I ask them if they go into how the gun is stored or who is trained to use it, and they don't consider that relevant. It's just there, that's enough. In recent talks on violence against women they again mentioned screening for gun ownership in the home. I don't think living with a fire-arm armed abuser is a good thing, but neither do I think that someone who's going to shoot their partner in the heat of an argument won't be able to find knife (or a boot) in the kitchen. If someone were to BUY a gun in the context of an acrimonius relationship, that might be an ominous sign--but would removing the gun change the risk? Could just as easily be a marker as a threat of it's own. People are also scared of me when they find out I have a folding knife... I ask them if they think it's going to jump out of my pocket and bite them (they work with bloody needles all the time and it's not an irrational fear, but just some serious respect involved--maybe it's just a matter of familiarity), or whether they'd want me not to assist if they were assaulted and I was around.

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 2:33 pm

Ian,

You might want to copy this article by Dr. Timothy Wheeler and show it to some of your medical friends.

http://www.haciendapub.com/article14.html

It explains that what they are doing is not healthcare, but political advocacy. As such it is recognized as a "boundary violation" and the patient has the ability to and every reason to file boundary violation charges against the physician, staff and facility.

On a personal note, a few years ago I was confronted with this in a doctor's office. I pushed the boundary violation issue with the net effect that all anti-self-defense pamphlets were removed from the office and staff was instructed that discussion of firearms ownership is a boundary violation just as discussion of personal financial information is, and was NOT policy.

The next time I went to that office, the magazines in the lobby included American Rifleman and Shotgun News!

It is interesting that your co-workers aren't just anti-gun, but anti-<fill-in-any-defensive-weapon>... There's a term for them... it's called Hoplophobia.

Take care...

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:18 pm

Hi Panther,

Remembering, of course, that I'm PRO-GUN, would you're response to your physician's gun queries be different if he asked if:

(a) You keep guns in the house and
(b) Do you keep them safe and secure to prevent access by unauthorized individuals and
(c) Do all the people with access to firearms in your house know how to handle one safely and how to prevent accidents
(d)or any other questions designed not to cast any judgements about your personal choice to lawfully own guns, but just to advance her patient's health and safety by making sure that the gun poses no greater risk than is acceptable?

Gene

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 12:34 am

Personally, my status as a gun owner is none of my doctor's business. However, if asked while in his office, I'd show him whatver I was carrying that day and explain all of the neat features on it and the special expanding ammo I use in it, then offer to take him to the range. Unfortunately, I have never been queried.

I told my kids and wife, if asked, to tell him about all of the firearms I have lying around the house. Just for the shock value of course.

Rich

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 1:15 am

Gene,

My response would be just as swift and just as sharp... When I go to see my Doctor, I expect her (him) to check me over, address any issues that arise with my health (such as sprains, hypertension from too much stress caused by dealing with anti-gun morons, torn ligaments/tendons, other aches and pains), and discuss options for alleviating any of those ailments. My ownership of firearms is not only none of the Doc's business, but it has no bearing on my health! Doctors are not criminologists... They are not the qualified professionals in the matter of firearms, personal defense and my personal safety in those regards. I seek the advice of a Medical Doctor for my medical health needs. I seek the advice of an Attorney for my legal needs. I seek the advice of a Mechanic for my automotive needs. I seek the advice of a CPA for my accounting needs. They are each professionals within their field of expertise and I wouldn't take advice from any about things not in their professional purview... Just as I don't listen to the advice of some complete moron on who to vote for in the latest election just because that complete moron happens to be from Hollywierd!

However... I have successfully enrolled numerous people who thought they were knowledgable about firearms in a firearms training class taught by the qualified staff over at GOAL... On my nickel BTW. So far I'm batting 1000... Every anti or fence-sitter I've sent for class has become a staunch gun-owner and believer in the 2nd Amendment.

They've been Engineers, Accountants, Lawyers, and even Doctors... and a few have been misguided soccer-moms who just thought guns were evil because (D)oprah Rosie say so!

In fact, I have a handful more going in over the next month! I figure it's a good way to spend the money until they pass the one-gun-a-month law... Then, of course, I'll need all the extra cash I can scrape up to make sure I buy one every single month for the rest of my life!

Rich,

I have seriously been discussing moving to the beeeeeeautiful Commonwealth of Virginia in a few years. In the People's Republic of Massachusetts, if you pull out your firearm in that situation, all the anti-gun Doc would have to do is call 911 and you would get arrested for "brandishing". I know that sounds strange to any reasonable person, but it's the facts of life in the PRoM! Anyway, I have a brother-in-law that lives in VA and I'd love to have less of the white-stuff to shovel... Ready for the move... Perhaps Richmond, Roanoke, Virginia Beach, or maybe even some place like Alexandria. Then again, the Blue Ridge always warms my heart... Maybe we'll head over to the Bristol area... Damn... Now I'm getting homesick!

IJ · Post by IJ » Mon Feb 17, 2003 3:02 am

The docs are generally lefties, and they do overreact. One who teaches us says he asks any LEO to leave the piece out with desk, as it makes him uncomfortable and they won't need it. Many just ask on the assumption that if there's a gun, it's a risk, and so they're helping if they identify it.

Hey, so that's not true. But I think the safelty kept question is a good one.

On the other hand, let's assume briefly that there was a well designed study that randomized people to nothing vs a gun plus training and the second group had more deaths. In other words they WERE the threat they think they are.

The primary care doctors job is to keep their patients healthy, period. Living longer and better.

We therefore ask under the health maintenance umbrella:

Alcohol history
Drug history
herbals, over the counters etc
smoking
other drugs and substances
seat belts and DUIs
spousal abuse history
last colonoscopy, pap, mammo, vaccinations including hepatitis, tetanus, pneumonia, where appropriate
diet
exercise
sexuality including what kind of sex you like to have with how many of which genders with and without latex involved
birth control.

These things, in fact, are our business. Where people don't want to discuss, we say ok, no problem, and let us know if that changes. If doctors ask about your guns, most are trying to help not usurp the constitution. They need to be educated on gun safety issues, not chastized for being in your business. Or what do the patients think?

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 11:52 am

IJ wrote: Hey, so that's not true. But I think the safelty kept question is a good one.

On the other hand, let's assume briefly that there was a well designed study that randomized people to nothing vs a gun plus training and the second group had more deaths. In other words they WERE the threat they think they are.

In Massachusetts, the "safely kept" question doesn't need to be answered. There are safe storage laws here, so the physician should know that anyone who legally owns a firearm either has them stored properly or doesn't care (and it won't make any difference). On the study part of gun-owners vs. non-gun-owners... that has been done. You've read Lott and Kleck and some of the other literature... Gun-owners are safer. And a US government study/report showed that teenagers who were involved in the shooting sports were far less likely to become juvinile delinquents that those who had no contact with firearms or those that had illegal contact with firearms!

The primary care doctors job is to keep their patients healthy, period. Living longer and better.

We therefore ask under the health maintenance umbrella:

Alcohol history
Drug history
herbals, over the counters etc
smoking
other drugs and substances
seat belts and DUIs
spousal abuse history
last colonoscopy, pap, mammo, vaccinations including hepatitis, tetanus, pneumonia, where appropriate
diet
exercise
sexuality including what kind of sex you like to have with how many of which genders with and without latex involved
birth control.

These things, in fact, are our business.

With the exception of seat belt use, those things have been shown to have an effect on health... some positive.

Where people don't want to discuss, we say ok, no problem, and let us know if that changes.

Unfortunately, that just isn't the norm. I'm glad that is the way you deal with things, but most helath professionals aren't that way. The fact is that when a person is sitting in a johnny in an examination room, they are in a very vunerable position. Many physicians take advantage of that to get information that they use against the person and that is a boundary violation. Just to let you know, I know of a case recently in Massachusetts, where a man was asked about guns by his Dr. The doctor engaged him in a conversation acting interested in the shooting sports and discussed the man's hunting hobby. Later, the man's insurance was cancelled! Why? Because the Dr had put his "concerns" about the man's firearms ownership in his medical file! Fortunately, the man has found other insurance. Unfortunately, he has had a very had time getting that removed from his file.

If doctors ask about your guns, most are trying to help not usurp the constitution. They need to be educated on gun safety issues, not chastized for being in your business. Or what do the patients think?

I'm willing to educate, but as you've already pointed out... there are a lot of "lefties" in the medical ranks. If a doctor is doing political advocacy, I change doctors. There are good and bad everywhere...

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 9:40 pm

Ian,

Here are some links that may be useful... enjoy.

http://www.2asisters.org/home.htm I know some members... great group.

http://www.pinkpistols.com I know one of the founders and I'm a member... (Being gay isn't a requirement for membership)

http://www.wagc.com/ (All women are NOT for gun control)

http://www.jpfo.org/ I know the founder and I'm a member... (Being Jewish isn't a requirement for membership)

And one I'm sure you'll appreciate:

http://www.dsgl.org/ (A group of Doctors who believe in "First, do no harm")

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 10:04 pm

Great site Panther. I was looking for it but could not remember the name of the organization. This is what Ian is looking for.

Thanks, Rich

IJ · Post by IJ » Tue Feb 18, 2003 2:02 am

Great sites Rich, thanks.

Panther, whatcha mean seatbelts don't work? Last I looked they cut fatalities 50%, in large part by reducing ejection from the vehicle.

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:37 am

I didn't mean to imply that seatbelts don't work. In fact, I have worn a seatbelt since I was a kid... before it was mandatory. What I meant is that a physician questioning me about seatbelt use is something I wouldn't answer. Not be cause I don't use them, but because I don't think they should be required by law. I also wouldn't discuss with my physician the rates of speed I drive, the type of vehicles I drive, or whether I own/ride a motorcycle. None of their business. If I go see my doctor and there is a problem, I will discuss life-style choices that might contribute and changes to those life-style choices. IOW, if, for example, my cholesterol was high (it's not), I would discuss diet with my physician in order to learn if that was the cause and make any recommended changes. The vehicle that I use for travel is my personal choice and how I drive it is as well... If I kill myself because I'm too stupid to drive and chew gum at the same time, well... I guess Darwin just took care of me and the Doctor doesn't have to worry about it. If I hurt someone else, then I take personal responsibility for my actions. I've heard the lecture before about people who ride bikes being referred to as "organ donors"... My life... My bike... My decision... buzz off.

(BTW, I wear a helmet, but helmet laws ******!) OTOH, when the doctor asks if the patient smokes and notes that (s)he has a distinct shortness of breath or the lungs sound congested during the exam... then a discussion of any smoking habit is in order.

Gun control data

Gun control data

Boundary Violations