NRA and Florida gag pediatricians: no more firearm safety advice for parents

[sasha031]

An NRA-lobbied bill in Florida will prohibit doctors, especially pediatricians, from asking patients about their gun-safety. The bill is expected to be signed by Governor Rick Scott. Pediatricians routinely advise parents about seatbelts, bike helmets, etc, but this law will make it illegal for a doctor to offer advice on gun safety unless "it's directly relevant to the patient's care or the safety of others." Comparable legislation is under discussion in North Carolina and Alabama.

As parents know, pediatricians ask a lot of questions. Dr. Louis St. Petery says it's all part of what doctors call "anticipatory guidance" -- teaching parents how to safeguard against accidental injuries. Pediatricians ask about bike helmets, seat belts and other concerns.
"If you have a pool, let's talk about pool safety so we don't have accidental drownings," he says. "And if you have firearms, let's talk about gun safety so that they're stored properly -- you know, the gun needs to be locked up, the ammunition stored separate from the gun, etc., so that children don't have access to them."

For decades, the American Academy of Pediatrics has encouraged its members to ask questions about guns and how they're stored, as part of well-child visits.
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/05/08/nra-and-florida-gag.html?dlvrit=36761

[enki23]

1. freeeedooooooom!!!!!!11 (through passing laws restricting free speech of private citizens)

please, won't someone think of the firearms?

[lawodevolution]

57. Where were you when they passed HIPPA Duhhhh you just hate guns and that's why you care

About this one

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lawodevolution]

119. The government already regulates heavily what doctors can say

And the iPhone correction software coverts it to HIPPA, I'm not saying your wrong

[Name removed]

146. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

161. My doctor is my employee and she serves at my pleasure

If I sought guidance to end a pregnancy I was unable to see to term law prohibiting her from lecturing me with anti-abortion talking points is not a restriction on her free speech. She's free to be pro-life but I am not obligated to have my life conform to her political agenda or to listen to her preaching.

[Zoeisright]

2. That completely violates the principles of medical ethics.

Repukes sure like to make government big and intrusive, don't they? Lying assholes.

[lawodevolution]

58. Ohh? Can you name the principle violated?

[TheWraith]

77. Actually no, what the doctor in Florida did violated medical ethics.

Refusing someone medical care because you don't agree with their lifestyle? Seems to me that when this was pro-lifer pharmacists refusing to dispense the morning after pill, DU was ready to string them up--and rightfully so.

[jpak]

3. The fascist GOP/NRA Nanny State burns the First Amendment

Only pre-approved Fascist GOP/NRA Nanny State questions my be asked in FL doctor's offices.

Oh yeah - the first version of this POS bill would fine doctors up to $5 million for asking about guns in the home

Fuck the GOP

Fuck the NRA

yup

[lawodevolution]

56. Read up on HIPPA. Doctors on duty have no right to violate patient privacy and guns are

A privacy issue

[iverglas]

79. get a gripaa

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/index.html

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/summary/index.html

You've read up on it, one assumes. Tell us what on earth you are talking about.

[lawodevolution]

118. How are your hate laws coming along up there? Any news stations shut down recently for reporting

What the gov deems as not true?

[iverglas]

122. you're pretty funny

Not remotely ... uh ... factual in your ... uh ... less than intelligent insinuations, but good for a laugh.

[krispos42]

114. Yeah, because it's only if the doctors scare the shit out of new parents

...is pre-approved questions with a government-endorsed Nanny State questions A-OK with you.

[elehhhhna]

4. Yeah that's totally constitutionally valid. Totally.

lmao

[lawodevolution]

59. HIPPA... Read up on it

[FLPanhandle]

5. unless "it's directly relevant to the patient's care or the safety of others."

Seems like that caveat is open for interpretation. Could be a useful loophole.

[Snoutport]

6. kr important stuff!

[DrDan]

7. protecting the arsenal takes priority of child safety - another NRA victory!!!!

[lawodevolution]

61. Privacy trumps anti gun political activism in the doctors office and they can still

Advise in patient safety. I advise mine to buy gun safes and keep all their guns, blades, chemicals and medications in them if they have kids and at no point do I ask them if they own a gun. It's better to assume everyone has a gun in the house.

[DissedByBush]

145. Child safety is actually a big part of NRA education programs

Anti-gunners do NOT like this safety education program.

Anti-gun doctors are just mad that they can't come down on parents over having guns.

And I don't see it applied equally: Do you have a car? Do you keep the keys away from the kids? Do you have child seats? Are they properly installed? Is your car properly maintained? Tires checked and inflated? Airbag disabled in cases where kids must sit there? Is your car so old it isn't relatively safe?

Those issues are far more likely to result in a child fatality if answered negative, but I was never asked those by a pediatrician.

Every American pediatrician I ever had asked about the guns and I responded that it was not that doctor's business.

[barbtries]

8. this is absurd.

why?

[sasha031]

9. because they don't care,

[FLPanhandle]

13. Overreaction to one pediatrician in Florida

A mother refused to answer the "Do you have any guns in the house" question. The doctor basically told the mother to answer the question or take her child to another pediatrician. That led to a denial of care vs. privacy debate.

Naturally, the legislature felt they needed a whole new law for because one doctor went a little overboard.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Bad cases make for bad law

Thus the hysteria over so called assault clips

[FLPanhandle]

25. Politicians are good at overreacting though

Probably one of the few things they do well.

[intaglio]

44. Misquote, It's hard cases

and there is nothing hard about case of extended clips - they are unnecessary and should be banned.

[spin]

47. You make it sound so simple ...

all we have to do is ban extended magazines.

What would you do about the millions of extended magazines that are already in circulation?

Do you realize that many massacres have been accomplished without extended magazines?

Do you realize that even during the assault weapons ban, extended magazines were readily available? They just cost more.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. Actually it get said both ways...and your assertion is far from fact about large capacity magazines

and there is no such thing as an extended clip

[intaglio]

76. So thats what the gun dungeon is claiming now

Because High Capacity sounds so much more - professional

It may be said both ways but if the word "Bad" is used on relation to the case it either makes no sense or destroys the original meaning whilst the word "Hard" in relation to case keeps the original sense, meaning and the original quotation.

[pipoman]

97. My lawn mower quit running today

so I changed the transmission and now it runs fine.


transmission??

Words mean something, as you seem to be pointing out....ironic that the same doesn't go for the name of parts, huh?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

116. Your hypocrisy is so blatant that it is a self parody

And your pathetic word games only make it more so.

Extended magazines would be those that extend beyond the hand grip for most pistols or beyond those supported in the design. There is nothing special about them and there is no magic number. The standard magazine for a 1911A is 7 rounds, for a M9 it would be 14. For many rifles the concept is not even relevant.

[intaglio]

121. I ask that the correct wording be used

One that carries the sense intended rather than something imposed upon it. A bad case might be many things; one brought without sufficient evidence would be a bad case or massaging the wording of one piece of legislation into applying to a different area of the law would be another.

A hard case is something very different. Abortion, for example always presents hard cases because there is no definition of life; either it is too general or too specific; hence we have to bumble along with bad and ineffective laws that makes criminals or victims of women.

As for hypocritical? I'm not, because I make my contempt for the many self-justifying, nit picking occupants of the "Guns" forum pretty clear and do not try to disguise it. I have huge respect for those very few guns forum members who appear have a reasonable world view. The understand the concerns of those not overly protective of deadly toys.

On extended magazines, please make your thoughts clear to the engineers and designers of weapons that more is better and every privately held weapon should have the ability to carry magazines with 10 to 40 rounds in excess of regular design at no detriment to balance or utility. While you're at it you could go the whole hog and ask that helical magazines be perfected.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

123. As do I

The literature is replete with Hard Cases and Bad Cases being used yet you hammer on that while criticizing RKBA supporters for being nit picking for insisting that words have specific meanings in what is a very technical discussion. All that does is further destroy your credibility.

What is reasonable to one is unreasonable to another, but if you wish to place SU or the yupmeister on a pedestal, see the end of the prior paragraph.

Extended magazines (those beyond the designers intent) are already freely available, but no serious shooter uses them. They are novelty items at best. However, you have a specific numeric limit in mind having nothing to do with the design. Show a little integrity and own up to it.

As for another matter of technical accuracy, helical magazines have been out for some time on multiple weapons...not sure if I would call them perfected, but they certainly are reliable and available.

[intaglio]

125. Novelty Items?!

tell that to Rep Giffords and the families of those killed.

Accuracy in the use of legal aphorisms is essential otherwise you end up defending the indefensible - oh, you just did, silly me.

Helical mags are overly complex, are known to jam and are bitches to reload, they are about as far from perfect as the Puckle gun. They would not be produced at all unless there were a few, gadget obsessed people willing to pay excessive amounts for them.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

132. Keep pounding on a false issue all you want...from a firearms perspective, they are indeed novelties

IIRC, in the Gifford case, one of them jammed while reloading. Also a trained user can change magazines quickly enough to make them an unnecessary in terms of true rate of fire (vice cyclic rate).

If helical, AKA spiral magazines are so unusable, someone needs to tell Victor Kalashnikov.

[intaglio]

134. Wrong Helical

.

The lunatic Loughner was able to fire until he tried to reload. And your "Novelty Items" comment still was a defense of the indefensible

[ProgressiveProfessor]

143. The terms helical and spiral are often used interchangeably to describe similar approaches

it depends on the author and at times the translation. They also seem to be reasonably reliable. You have not been clear about why they bother you.

As for the novelty nature of extended magazine, you still fail to point out why they are indefensible.

[SteveM]

148. I don't care that much about terminology...

...unless one seeks to ban the item.

[pipoman]

96. Unnecessary? Unnecessary?

Do you really want "unnecessary" to be the threshold for banning? Really? Cars which go over 70 mph? Unnecessary. ATVs? Unnecessary. Swimming pools? Unnecessary. Skis? Unnecessary. Alcohol? Unnecessary. All kill more people than extended magazines...by the thousands...think about it.

[Lursa CB]

105. Unnecessary? Heh, get rid of trans fats

Nice reply Pipoman!

And who declares how many bullets IS necessary for self defense? A magazine for 5 bullets? 10 bullets? The standard magazine for my 9mm is 17 (plus 1). Most anti-gun people dont realize that it often takes more than one shot to STOP someone (not kill them...they can keep on attacking you and go die later....you need to STOP an attack)...and now what happens if there are 2 or 3 attackers?

So, who decides how many bullets is necessary to save your life?

[intaglio]

126. Unneccessay already is the threshold

Full auto weapons are no longer sold - or do you know something the BATF should know.

[pipoman]

128. That isn't true.

Full autos are in fact sold. There are restrictions, but I, or any other non-felon, non-domestic abuser can/do own and shoot full autos, tanks, mortars, howitzers, hand grenades, and a whole host of other light and heavy armaments.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=228362328

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=228223689

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=228464011

[intaglio]

129. You have just lowered my opinion of US gun law even further n/t

[pipoman]

131. Really?

Did you know there hasn't been a single murder committed with an automatic weapon in the US in over 30 years?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

147. Don't you mean *legally registered* automatic weapon?

I have to imagine, at some point, an MG was used somewhere in the last 30 years.

[sylveste]

162. and if

we banned large sodas the obesity epidemic would go away, after all noone needs more than a small coke.

[jpak]

10. Kicking - so how do NRA types justify this?

clue - they can't

yup

[spin]

60. Marion Hammer, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association in Florida ...

summed up the views of "NRA types" when she said, “We take our children to pediatricians for medical care, not moral judgment or privacy invasion.”
source: http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/04/pediatricians-back-away-from-fma-nra-compromise-over-guns/

I am an NRA member and I understand her point however I also feel that it is important to tell parents about the importance of securing firearms from children. A simple method of doing this would be for the pediatrician to hand out a pamphlet to parents that discusses methods of securing a firearm and if the parent asks to provide advise.

[Logical]

74. Well, our ped asked my wife and I about guns, trampolines, prescription meds, etc.....

and we did not feel offended and I had no issues with it. I never felt like it was moral judgement. It was the doctor being concerned.

I think that a doctor asking about guns is no problem.

I think this is a case of the NRA over reacting. And Florida also.

[spin]

94. When you told your pediatrician that you owned guns ...

did he say that he would no longer be your doctor?

Gun-rights groups say the measure was prompted by complaints from gun owners following an incident this summer in which an Ocala area physician told a couple to find a new pediatrician after they refused to answer questions about whether they had guns in their home and how they were stored.

Marion Hammer, executive director of United Sportsmen of Florida and a former national NRA president, said the gun rights groups have no opposition to a physician’s office handing out brochures on gun safety, but the direct questioning on whether there are guns in the home of a patient and how they store them goes too far.

“Simply, it’s none of their business,” Hammer said.
http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/01/dont-ask-gun-bill-introduced-promising-showdown-between-nra-and-florida-medical-association/

There also was some fear that a doctor might reveal to an insurance company that the parents owned firearms and this might cause a cancellation of their policy or an increase in their rates. I consider this unlikely.

Personally I see no real problems with a physician asking about firearms and I often use such a conversation as an excuse to avoid a prostrate exam. On the other hand I really don't want a representative of the Brady Campaign to lecture me on firearm ownership or to tell me to find another doctor because he doesn't agree with my owning firearms and the fact that I sometimes have young children in my house. I have gun safes and lock boxes and my firearms are secure.

[Lursa CB]

109. trampolines arent a right

I have no problem with docs providing safety info about helmets, pools, dogs, trampolines, etc. Or guns. However how likely is that at doctor will stop treating a kid because parents have guns? Esp. if the parents already can describe responsible measures for gun securing and use?

If a doc refuses to treat because there are guns in the home and places that above a child's welfare, find another doctor.

(And btw, owning pools and trampolines arent Constitutional Rights, owning guns is.)

[lawodevolution]

62. Patient privacy

I assume patients have guns and simply advise them to get a gun safe and out all dangerous items in the house in the safe including guns

[iverglas]

80. say what??

You're a pediatrician?

Perhaps you're adopting another voice ...

You might want to adopt the voice of someone who actually knows what patient privacy means.

[lawodevolution]

120. Not peds. Here is some advice. You are not smarter or superior to other posters here

Just post ideas. No need for personal insults designed to make you feel better about yourself by demeaning others

[TPaine7]

133. She's a Goddess--the Goddess of Truth and Beauty...

just ask her!

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpak]

17. but...but...but...he Holy Second Amendment is Absolute and Trumps all!!11

not

Fuck the NRA

yup

[rl6214]

65. Snark and insults

good job

[jpak]

69. and yer an angel in that dept?

:rofl:

[rl6214]

81. Only difference is that I WILL provide stats and cites

to back my pro-gun arguement, you won't

EVER

[SteveM]

149. IMO, Gun-controller/prohis aid the GOP with every post....

...they certainly aid the NRA.

[Oneka]

26. the lack of posts in support of this

law, by gun rights supporters, is likely due to the fact that most of them don't support it.

I know i sure don't support it, I don't support infringements on ANY rights.

I didn't reply to posts on this thread initially because of folks here like you constantly attacking gun owners
like myself and conflating us with RW, Tea Bagging, Nra assholes, and now cowards.

I also don't mind one bit remaining silent on 1st amendment rights issues, after seeing the advocating for 2A rights violations, here in the

gungeon, day after day, ad-nauseum.


"Do you love it?
Do you hate it?
There is
The way you made it!"

[hack89]

27. Here I am!

and I think it is a stupid law.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hack89]

29. No - stupidity trumps rational thought is more like it. nt

[lawodevolution]

63. Were you angry when they passed HIPPA? Hypocrite

[rl6214]

66. Good job patiod, do you call every gun owner a "gun nut"?

[sharesunited]

16. Anticipatory guidance deemed necessary because most people are incompetent to be partents.

License reproduction.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. It never ceases to amaze me how many freedoms and rights you oppose

[sharesunited]

30. Just seeking the level of freedom which the society can handle.

Same reason we don't let 6-year-olds drive or vote.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. So you now set your self up as the deciding authority on what society can handle

Sorry, some of us are clearly better than that

[cleanhippie]

89. "Just seeking the level of freedom which the society can handle" - BOOKMARKING!!!!!!!

Are you fucking KIDDING me?

[friendly_iconoclast]

102. That rates right up there with "The thing is we can't trust a big section of the population"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=412302#412368

The control freaks are out in swarms lately...

[Lursa CB]

110. The more you take away, the less able society is to take care of itself

x10

Please see my sig.

[ileus]

18. Don't all gun owners keep their guns safe from their children? I do.

[jpak]

19. No they don't and the papers are filled with stories about kids killed by guns in the home

When I post these in the Gungeon, I'm accused of spamming

The Gungeoneers don't like to hear the truth about gun violence in this country

yup

[Lursa CB]

111. accidents are not violence

That's not gun violence, that's an accident...and lots of them occur in families all the time, tragically. Look at all the pool drownings, the kids that accidentally run over their siblings, the dogs that maim and kill, the kids playing with matches that burn down homes (and family members), the car accidents where parents kill their kids.....

Compared with kids that drown or die in car wrecks...pfft, gun accidents are nothing.

[SteveM]

150. You need correcting. Childhood death rates by guns are on the decline...

and have been for several years.

Yours is NOT the truth, and you very well know it. You have been corrected. Again.

[Buzz Clik]

23. Correct. There has yet to be an incidence of a child accidentally shooting their parent's gun.

:sarcasm:

[Zoeisright]

28. Is this an honest question?

Of course they don't. Christ.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x412636

[Buzz Clik]

21. Can't have that! In Indiana, the legislature is working on a law requiring doctors...

... to tell patients that abortions cause breast cancer. But gun safety? Nah. Just patch up the kids later.

[shadowrider]

24. "Firearms safety advice" is a helluva lot different from a complete denial of care

based on an answer or (non)answer.

Kudos on this ruling. It's nobodys business if I have a weapon in the house.

[jpak]

35. Yeah the first amendment sucks

yup

[TPaine7]

38. Wow! I agree with the Yupmeister.

You cannot legitimately stop a doctor from asking questions. Even if it is technically constitutional, due to licensing or professional constraints, it's unAmerican. Much better would be banning doctors from dropping patients for owning guns or for refusing to answer (or banning doctors from interrogating children).

If a doctor who is told where to put her anti-gun sentiments cannot drop the patient, then both people's speech is protected.

[SteveM]

151. I've looked at this debate, and I think instructing doctors on what to say or not say

is unconstitutional. We just had a judge in Texas (Sam Sparks) rule key provisions of the state-mandated sonogram bill unconstitutional. The law would have required docs to insert an instrument into a pregnant woman's uterus, and explain to her about the fetus; something the anti-choice Far Right wanted. If docs didn't do as they were told, they would have been subject to penalty. The law still stands, but the jazz about explaining to women what was going on was ruled a violation of free speech.

Now, if the law in Florida were narrowly drawn so as to only prevent a doc's "coercive" behavior, or thwarting of health care, then such legislation might be acceptable.

[Logical]

31. I am 100%% pro-gun and pro concealed carry but the NRA is a POS. n-t

[GKirk]

32. Why shouldn't a pediatrician just....

...assume that the parents have guns in their home instead of ask them?

Currently if they ask the parents and they say 'no'
I assume that is the end of the conversation.

If they assume all parents have guns they could just give a little speech about
safe gun storage or hand out a little flyer.

Wouldn't that make more sense?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

36. Gun Safety pamphlets should be sitting in the waiting room and

exam rooms. Free for the taking. With phone numbers to call for more suggestions and information.

[SteveM]

152. Agreed.

[S_B_Jackson]

33. Why would I ever ask a pediatrician for firearm safety advise?

I doubt that most of them have ever shot a firearm, and if so, likely never received any proper safety training in their proper,handling, use, or storage.

[slackmaster]

34. That's a really dumb idea

:nuke:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TPaine7]

39. Why? Why would a citizen who carries concealed, feel dumb listening to someone

who almost certainly knows less about the subject attempting to educate her?

If you were lecturing a guy on physics, only to learn later that he was a physics professor, would you assume that he should have felt stupid--as opposed to, say..., YOU?

You probably would, being a typical anti...

[Hoyt]

41. Knowledge is more than knowing the nomenclature of the parts of the guns you adore.

The reason we have so many accidental shooting with guns owned by "law abiding" citizens, is that the fools either didn't know or didn't think about safety. I think annually as part of permitting, you ought to be made to sit and watch photos of people with bullet holes in them and all the blood spatter, and spend a full day in a morgue. It's totally different from watching an NRA produced training video or spending hours on the range blasting away at silhouette targets.

[TPaine7]

42. You realize that the NRA trains the POLICE, right?

Fortunately, your views of training will likely never have any impact outside you mind.

[Hoyt]

45. NRA training is small part of training. Probably more to show law enforcers the BS that is out there

I suspect -- and you should too -- that is just another lame attempt by the NRA to regain some of the credibility they lost years ago.

[PavePusher]

48. Uh, the NRA has run training programs for almost 150 years.

If it's "just another lame attempt by the NRA to regain some of the credibility they lost years ago", it seems to be an exceptionally long-term effort.

The more your mouth dribbles, the more you prove your ignorance. Keep up the good work.

P.S. Got a definition for "gun cache" yet?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

50. As usual you do not let facts get in your way of your screeds

They also certify almost all instructors outside of the DoD
They are the primary firearms training organization outside of the DoD

[Hoyt]

72. There are any number of certifying agencies. The NRA is just one.

[PavePusher]

103. Name two more... with national recognition. n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

159. No answer after four months. IOW- the usual horseshit n/t

[PavePusher]

163. Naw, horseshit at least makes my veggies grow. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

117. Name some and their market share

Every instructor I know, regardless of organization, is NRA certified. The others are just ticket punches...

[spin]

54. The Law Enforcement Division (LED) of the NRA was established in 1960 ...

that's half a century ago. The NRA had no credibility problems in 1960. JFK was a lifetime member.

The NRA as an organization has been providing firearms training, competition, and safety programs since its inception in 1871. Political issues aside, it has long been considered the leading authority in the promotion, instruction, and certification of safe, effective, firearm handling, and has been doing this longer than any other organization in the world.

The Law Enforcement Division (LED) of the NRA was established in 1960 specifically to provide the law enforcement community with a “certified” and standardized law enforcement firearm instructor training program. Over the last 50 years, we have trained more than 50,000 law enforcement firearm instructors and currently have over 11,000 instructors.emphasis added

We in LED take this commitment very seriously. Each of our instructors are former police officers from around the country and are highly trained, well-respected professionals in this arena. We understand that the NRA can be a very political subject for many departments, but let us assure you, politics are not part of our lesson plans. Providing the best training possible to our law enforcement officers is our number one priority. Politics are left completely out of the classroom. We have only one goal in mind -- to provide every law enforcement officer in the country with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to WIN a lethal encounter!
http://www.nrahq.org/law/training/training.asp

Any organization that has 11,000 instructors in ANYTHING would appear to be making a serious not a lame effort. How many firearm safety instructor does the Brady Campaign have?

NRA Law Enforcement Firearm Instructor Development Schools are held throughout the United States and are designed to help instructors conduct safe, effective and realistic police firearm training for their agencies or departments. Instructor candidates must successfully complete a five-day Instructor Development School to be certified. NRA Certified Instructor programs include: handgun, handgun/shotgun, tactical shotgun, patrol rifle, precision rifle, and select-fire courses. LEAD also offers tuition-free armorer schools, which teach repair, diagnostics and maintenance, and are provided in conjunction with major firearm manufacturers.

LEAD also offers many benefits to police including: the National Police Shooting Championships, discounted Firearm Instructor liability insurance, the Jeannie E. Bray memorial college scholarship fund, and a life insurance benefit program in case of death in the line of duty. NRA's Law Enforcement Activities Division is supported by the Davidson's Law Enforcement Endowment and the Law Enforcement Training Endowment of The NRA Foundation, as well as over 180 law enforcement groups and businesses.
http://www.nra.org/Article.aspx?id=1693

Note: I'm an NRA member despite the fact that I disagree with much of the political propaganda that the NRA-ILA sends to my mail box. The NRA does an excellent job with their hunter safety courses as well as their programs to train civilians in gun safety and to train police. Such courses save lives. For that reason alone, I feel they are worthy of supporting with my yearly membership fee.

[Hoyt]

70. Fortunately, LE does not rely solely on the NRA. It's a PR program to guns, nothing more.

[GreenStormCloud]

113. If the NRA has lost credibility, then why did they win so big in the 2010 elections?

Over half of the House and almost half of the Senate have NRA "A" ratings. For an organization to be that successful means they have an extremely high level of credibility with the general public.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

53. Would you require the equivalent for drivers or those who consume alcohol?

[rl6214]

68. As soon as all of that is required when you renew your drivers license.

After all, more people are killed in car accidents daily than by a gun.

[oneshooter]

157. Do you really believe that your little photo show would have any effect on

someone who lived it? You would run like a little girl, pissing your pants if you had the Marine next to you lose the contents of his head onto your chest and pack. Go look at your little show.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Oneka]

40. Thanks for the parenting advice,

But i will decide what, and what is not, a good example to set for my own children.

[rl6214]

67. Yeah, much better for them to talk about the dangers of gangs

the thug mentality, doing drugs, having drugs in the house like they do already.

What, you mean they don't ask about these things at a peds office?

[onehandle]

43. Republicans like to keep people nice and stupid. nt

[Hoyt]

46. That's true, and especially true when it comes to guns and right wingers.

[PavePusher]

49. Got a link to the actual legislative language?

IIRC, it forbids the physicians to ask about actual gun ownership, but does nothing to stop them from offering advice on safety, etc.

In other words, please present some actual evidence.

[beevul]

55. I wonder how doctors would feel about the nra giving medical advice to people. N/T

[Hoyt]

73. They do. They promote weapons that put big holes in people and can massacre a crowd in seconds.

[beevul]

78. Now I see your problem.

You think that constitutes medical advice.

[Hoyt]

84. Ever listen to gunners talking about loads, penetration, expansion, and other gruesome chit?

[cleanhippie]

91. Only when YOU talk about it. Some might even think you have some kind of fetish.

[PavePusher]

104. So, technical detail on hunting, self-defense and precision target shooting...

are "chit"?

You gonna define that word, or just leave another vague term floating in the wind?

[rrneck]

107. "Shit" is 'tacky". nt

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

124. Huh, what did I miss? n/t

[oneshooter]

158. Have you ever known him to think at all? n/t

[cleanhippie]

90. Bwahahahaha!

Dude, you watch too many movies.

[TPaine7]

64. Unrec for misleading headline

Questioning is not necessary to give advice. By pretending that it is, the OP's source is trying to deceive.

[Logical]

71. Why give advice to parents who have no guns? My ped asked us about.....

Trampolines. Should I bee offended? I wonder if trampoline sellers are pissed?

The NRA are idiots.

[aikoaiko]

75. All the pediatrician has to so is ask if the parents would like information on gun safety measures.

Its not that hard I think. There are lots of potentially dangerous items in homes should children get their fingers on them.

I left that box blank on my son's doctor's intake form.

[Logical]

83. Over reaction by the NRA and gun advocates as usual. Too paranoid. n-t

[rl6214]

86. Do you want your doctor asking what you do in your bedroom?

Unless I specifically ask my doctor a question pertaining to my bedroom activities or there is something that points to a question like that being medically relevent, it's none of their business.

[Logical]

87. Wow, really?

Trampolines
Poisons
Overweight
Unsafe Sex
Illegal Drugs
smoking
Guns
Etc.

All valid medical questions. Do you know what Primary Care doctors do?

Only when guns are involved do paranoid gun people over-react.

If it to the point where the extreme gun people look like fools.

If you don't like it find another doctor.

[rl6214]

92. Really? Yes..

Just how many of those items on your list are rights protected by the 2nd amendment?

You didn't answer my question:

Do you want your doctor asking what you do in your bedroom?
Unless there is something that points to a question like that being medically relevent

[Logical]

98. News for you....

The 2nd amendment says NOTHING about asking people if they have guns in the house. NOTHING. Please reread it.

And the gun issue has something to do with medicine. As does poison control and unsafe sex.

You are getting to the point where there is no use discussing anything with you because no logic applies.

[rl6214]

106. Sure it does, if blaming the nra for this law was logic

but demonizing the NRA (which I have pointed out in the past I am not a member of) does not fix anything, it just makes you sound like another member here that goes on endlessly about the evil nra.

If the doctor wants to hand out pamphlets on how to keep a safe home during your visit, great I don't have a problem with that. They do not have any right to question me what goes on in the privacy of my own home any more than the military has any right to ask it's service members what goes on in the privacy of their own homes.

[Logical]

108. He does have a right to ask you anything he wants and you have a right to not....

answer. He might ask you if you have unprotected sex. If you don't want to answer then LEAVE and find another doctor.

But it is a HEALTH BASED question.

I give up!

[aikoaiko]

95. I sort of agree. But I don't feel strongly either way. Like I said, I didnt answer my kids ped.

[spin]

100. You might have felt strongly if after you didn't answer ...

the pediatrician told you to find another doctor. That's what started all this bruhaha in Florida.

Gun-rights groups say the measure was prompted by complaints from gun owners following an incident this summer in which an Ocala area physician told a couple to find a new pediatrician after they refused to answer questions about whether they had guns in their home and how they were stored.
http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/01/dont-ask-gun-bill-introduced-promising-showdown-between-nra-and-florida-medical-association/

That's like your doctor asking if you were gay and when you refused to answer kicking you out the door.

Your insurance company might love to know if you own firearms or if you were gay.

[aikoaiko]

127. I have a big problem with the doctor discontinuing services because of the gun issue

That should be illegal.

[SteveM]

153. I tend to agree with you on this. nt

[rl6214]

144. N/a

[rl6214]

85. See this is where some question your motives here

Trampolines are not protected by the 2nd amendment. No one is trying to regulate trampoline purchases and usage. I understand that you don't like the NRA but they do provide some usefull services, you aren't willing to acknowledge that. It sounds like you object to the nra-il while the nra itself promotes gun safety/education.

[Logical]

88. Jesus crist, you get old......

First off, I don't care if you or anyone else question anything about me. You have said it so many times at this point, including saying you would stop saying it, that I don't give a shit.

Because I am anti open carry, and anti-NRA and think a doctor ASKING about a gun does not violate your right to CCW, I am anti-gun.

You realize you are saying the 2nd amendment guarantees the right of not being asked about your gun? LOL, that really takes the cake.

[rl6214]

93. Actually I said I would IM you

"You have said it so many times at this point"

Three

Obviously I have struck a nerve. I was just pointing out what I see.

This make no fucking sense:

"You realize you are saying the 2nd amendment guarantees the right of not being asked about your gun?"

"a doctor ASKING about a gun does not violate your right to CCW"
Where did you get this one from?

[Logical]

99. "Trampolines are not protected by the 2nd amendment"

You said that in reference to the doctor asking about guns in the house. So it must mean you think asking a patient about guns in the house has something to do with the 2nd. Which it does not.

LOL.....are you seriously trying to make points or just trying to be funny?

[rl6214]

82. Did not notice the blatant dishonesty in the title

"NRA and Florida gag pediatricians: no more firearm safety advice for parents"

Not sasha's dishonesty but that of the story cited. It's got nothing to do with safety advice for parents, its got to do with the peds invasive questions.

[spin]

101. I agree...

Marion Hammer, executive director of United Sportsmen of Florida and a former national NRA president, said the gun rights groups have no opposition to a physician’s office handing out brochures on gun safety, but the direct questioning on whether there are guns in the home of a patient and how they store them goes too far.emphasis added

“Simply, it’s none of their business,” Hammer said.
http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/01/dont-ask-gun-bill-introduced-promising-showdown-between-nra-and-florida-medical-association/

[Atypical Liberal]

130. They can provide information, but not ask questions.

I don't see why doctors need to ask any questions about pools, or bicycles, or firearms, or anything else.

If doctors want to give out safety information, then a simple pamphlet covering the most common child safety issues would suffice. It can cover bathtub/toilet safety, bucket safety, bicycle safety, swimming safety, and even firearm safety.

But there is no reason for a doctor to be asking questions about what sort of property a patient (or the patient's parents) own unless it has direct bearing on a current medical condition.

[cali]

135. Florida Bill Outlaws Asking Patients About Guns

By Emily P. Walker, Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today
Published: May 09, 2011

Click here to provide feedback

WASHINGTON -- The Florida state legislature has passed a bill that would make it illegal for pediatricians and other physicians to ask patients or their parents whether they have guns in their home.

Pediatricians often ask the question at initial well-child visits as a platform to discuss how to safely store guns in the home in order to prevent accidental shootings.

But under the law -- expected to be signed soon by Florida's governor -- doctors would face a $500 fine for inquiring about gun ownership and recording it in a patient's medical record. That fine would increase if a physician asked about guns at more than one visit.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), the main backer of the legislation, says questions about firearms don't belong in the doctor's office.

<snip>

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/PublicHealth/26385

[DrDan]

136. gotta protect the arsenal - child-safety be damned

[slackmaster]

137. So, doctors will still be able to offer information on safe gun storage, which they should do.

It's none of their business whether or not their patients own guns.

No doctor ever asked me or my wife about gun ownership when we had a child in the house.

[SteveM]

154. If a patient does not want to talk to Docs about guns, they shouldn't. nt

[Obamanaut]

138. Additional responses ->

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=412672

[slackmaster]

140. My response on that thread was based on taking its deceptive subject line at face value

It turns out that was just a lie.

[Angry Dragon]

139. NRA is correct

The NRA should be responsible to educate all gun owners in the same handling of firearms
and also be responsible for any and all shootings within homes.

For each and every discharge within the home the NRA will pay a fine of $10 million

[iwishiwas]

141. WHOW! No concern for the safety of children at all!

[SteveM]

155. You are wrong here...

The rate of childhood accidental deaths via guns has been in a significant and long-term decline. In fact, children are more likely to be killed/injured by other means. Check the National Safety Council.

All this has been the result of responsible gun-owners who have made the effort to secure firearms and ammunition properly. Though I am no fan of the NRA's political stances, they should be credited with promoting these practices.

You will note upstream that I (and some other pro-2A folks) do not support the law in question as currently drafted. It may surprise you that pro-2A people on this site have a lot more nuance and reasonableness than some gun-controller/prohibitionists.

[Euromutt]

142. This law is akin to using a sledgehammer to swat a mosquito

It's too heavy-handed a method of dealing with the problem, but at the same time, that's not say the mosquito doesn't need swatting.

The fact is, the AAP has eagerly swallowed hook, line and sinker the pseudoscience perpetrated by public health researchers like Arthur Kellermann about the supposed risks of keeping firearms in the home, and propagated it to its members.

As parents know, pediatricians ask a lot of questions. Dr. Louis St. Petery says it's all part of what doctors call "anticipatory guidance" -- teaching parents how to safeguard against accidental injuries. Pediatricians ask about bike helmets, seat belts and other concerns.
"If you have a pool, let's talk about pool safety so we don't have accidental drownings," he says. "And if you have firearms, let's talk about gun safety <...>

None of my kid's pediatricians have ever even asked me whether we have a pool. Admittedly, I live in western Washington state, not Florida, but then again, I've not been asked about bicycle helmets either. Shit, I've never been asked about where and how the household chemicals are stored, and you'd think that would be a more common concern than guns.

Admittedly, only one of the two has even asked about firearms, and only then on the general written questionnaire in the form "If you own firearms, do you keep them locked up?" But at the same time, that same questionnaire doesn't ask whether I have a pool, or put a helmet on the kid when he's on his bike, or what have you. The claim that this is merely one part of a more general practice of "anticipatory guidance" rings a bit hollow.

[SteveM]

156. Good points. The lack of "guidance" concerning other dangers discredits...

the "guidance" about gun safety. In an sense the AAP has set themselves up for this kind of over-reaching legislation by politicizing the issue. There should be no forced enunciation of doctrine by docs, there should be no coercive action against patients, there should be no penalty for bringing up the subject. The law suffers by preventing docs from even bringing up the subject.

[PavePusher]

164. Umm, no. The docs can preach gun safety all day long.

They simply can't ask about actual ownership, or drop patients for not answering or for answering in the affirmative.

[SteveM]

165. My intent here is not to coerce a patient nor muzzle the doctor...

I agree that the doc should not inquire as to weapons ownership, or drop patients who do not respond or respond appropriately. If the legislation merely protects the patient, fine. I hope the legislation does NOT prohibit a doctor from "preaching" about safety, or offering suggestions as to gun-safety.

Frankly, this seems to be the purview of the state licensing board's best practices.