A federal appeals court has affirmed that Florida can ban doctors and psychiatrists from asking their patients any questions about whether or not they own guns, reports Psychiatric News.
According to Psychiatric News, the American Psychiatric Association and American Medical Association had argued to the court that “asking about gun ownership and the presence of guns in the home is an important health-related screening tool, similar to asking about substances of abuse, smoking, and eating habits.”
Though no patient was obligated to answer their physicians’ questions, Psychiatric News reports that the court stated that, when a patient enters a physicianâs examination room, “the patient is in a position of relative powerlessness… [and must] submit to the physicianâs authority.â Therefore, the majority of the appeals court panel ruled that the Florida law banning such questions âsimply codifies that good medical care does not require inquiry or record keeping regarding firearms when unnecessary to a patientâs care… Any burden the Act places on physician [freedom of] speech is thus entirely incidental.â
Court Upholds Ban on Doctors Discussing Gun Ownership (Psychiatric News,
August 29, 2014. DOI: 10.1176/appi.pn.2014.9a12)
Now if guns weren’t legal and readily available for purchase by any and everybody, this ridiculous situation would not have arisen. In other words, if people didn’t have guns, then they couldn’t shoot each other! And of course, it is not the people who have been diagnosed as mentally ill that are dangerous and need to be keep away from guns, it is everybody.
So here’s my suggestion: Let’s pass a law that says that anybody who is taking any kind of psychotropic medication, should be prohibited from owning a firearm. This might not reduce the number of guns sold and held in the US, but it might just help reduce the number of folks on psychotropic medications.
yeah they can’t own a car either, or a house, or anything because they are a slave.
I once saw a movie where only the police and military were allowed to have guns.
It was called Schindler’s List.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/07/The-Trivialization-of-SWAT
And I’d appreciate it if you could cite a study which has actually succeeded in its attempt to discredit Professor John Lot’s work.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/177-1698894-0057861?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=More+Guns+Less+Crime
A fairly basic model to deal with ‘unwanted persons’ in a Nation State.
Identify (label)
Ostracize (stigma)
Confiscate (Rights and property)
Concentrate (Poor areas, Data)
Annihilate (Direct or indirect)
Seems the only one of these that our ‘humane’ society doesn’t allow is Direct annihilation. I’ll hang on to my guns until the weather is a little better I think.
Hi Boans.
Let’s see what happens in a country where it’s practically impossible for people who aren’t Govt. to own guns.
Communist China:
China Sentences 3 Muslim Terrorists To Death, 1 To Life In Jail, In Knife Attack That Left 31 Dead, 141 Injured.
http://weaselzippers.us/199611-china-sentences-3-muslim-terrorists-to-death-1-to-life-in-jail-in-knife-attack-that-left-31-dead-141-injured/
Let’s have a look at “Assault Weapons” pose too great a threat to allow non-Govt. types to own them. too:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/14/NYT-Assault-Weapons-A-Myth-Democrats-Created-In-1990s
As opposed to How many needless deaths attributed directly to medicine?
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm
This fully referenced report shows the number of people having in-hospital, adverse reactions to prescribed drugs to be 2.2 million per year. The number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections is 20 million per year. The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million per year. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million per year.
The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year. It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. (By contrast, the number of deaths attributable to heart disease in 2001 was 699,697, while the number of deaths attributable to cancer was 553,251.5)
Hi Dbunker,
I live in a country where the public has been disarmed, Australia.
Can I say I was surprised at what it was like in the US when I visited pre 9/11. People seemed to go about their business without too much interference. It’s all relative in many ways but… what I noticed.
Over here now it is not uncommon to be threatened with rape by police if you swear in public. What one would expect when the balance of power is tipped in one direction. Still, not a lot of people complaining about it so I guess they must like it this way. Or are they just too scared to speak out?
I cant help but wonder about that cancer statistic you quote right at the end of your post. Who was the half a person? And then I realised it was quite likely someone diagnosed with a mental illness, coz they don’t count as whole people lol.
I think the police and military could also get rid of some weapons. There was a point in time when in UK most policemen didn’t carry guns.
You have a point. I quite don’t get the American obsession with guns. I think it’s a vicious cycle with other aspects of violence in society…
Hmmm I know if I was making a decision as to whether to violate a persons civil and human rights, information about whether they had firearms, and knew where I lived would have an influnce on my opinion.
I don’t want to anger someone in a position to resist my oppression.
I have very mixed emotions about this law as someone who despise the fact that people are allowed to have guns in this country. Yet, at the same time, with a doctor asking about gun ownership, it feels like another one of those intrusive questions that has nothing to do with the patient’s situation that brought him/her into the office.
and one which can get you locked up… I sympathise with your dilemma.
I am very much in favor of the second amendment. In fact, I think that it being second in the bill of rights is an accurate ranking of the set of rights Americans have. The rights listed in the first amendment are the most fundamental of all. The second amendment is the best safeguard we have against the US becoming tyrannical. In fact, Switzerland also understands gun ownership this way.
Regardless of this, I think that the great news included in the ruling for our community is an explicit recognition by a Circuit Federal Court of the power imbalance that exists in the doctor/patient relationship. It takes the medical profession, and psychiatry in particular, a step closer to be legally considered as law enforcement. The more rulings like this in other areas of life, the better.
“The second amendment is the best safeguard we have against the US becoming tyrannical.”
Except that it’s obsolete these days. No matter how many guns you’ll have the gov has tanks and nukes. That’s not a very productive way to fight against tyranny.
Ask the US army how things went in Afghanistan and how things are going in Iraq now.
A population with almost one gun per person, the United States, would give a tyrannical army a run for its money. And obviously, said army would not nuke all the united states, after all, where would the tyrant and his followers live if they did?
The second amendment is as good a safeguard against tyranny as it was 200 years ago. Of course there are byproducts to that, but at least we can reasonably assured that a Milosevic or Hitler would not happen around here.
The only way to win against a tyranny is to get millions of people on your side and be prepared to suffer and die. If you think that US gov would not bring tanks against his own people you may want to look at examples from other parts of the globe.
Tanks and guns are old technology. They will be picking people off in the street with drones.
Anwar al Awlaki has set a precedent. Government hit lists will be expanded.
Welcome to the Brave New World.
Doctors are also being forced to lie about the effects of abortion in some states. It seems that many courts have no problem with interfering with the First Amendment rights of medical doctors.
I’d bet it has something to do with NRA…
Given the recent self-defence shooting of a patient by a psychiatrist, perhaps psychiatrists should be required to disclose if they are armed. One might choose not to be treated by an armed psychiatrist as many of them are taking psychotropic medications themselves.
Do you have a link on that event?
— Steve
I’d be interested in seeing that too.
I know developments where I live are that mental health workers are being issued with proxy weapons (a thug with pepper spray and night stick). Cheaper to issue them with pistols really, save the taxpayer a heap.
Here it is.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/us/pennsylvania-hospital-shooting/
Here it comes,
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/doctor-2-shot-pennsylvania-hospital-article-1.1879032
Congress shall pass no law…
Duane