Florida Federal Judge Spikes Doc Gun Gag

“A federal district court today entered a final judgment permanently blocking enforcement of Florida’s law barring health care professionals from asking patients if they own guns and have them stored properly,” sacbee.com reports. No wait. It’s a PR Newswire press release republished by The Sacramento Bee. Which explains why the text asserts that “These questions are a key element in the practice of preventive medicine.” Key? As in as important as diet and exercise? More important than [not] texting while driving? Just as important as swimming pool safety? Blah blah blah. It doesn’t matter. As TTAG pointed out before the legislation was passed, doctors’ discussions with their patients is none of the government’s god damn business. Fortunately, thanks to the free market for health care in the United States, gun-owning patients whose doctors get all squirrely about firearms can find another doctor. In theory. . .

comments

  1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    Hahahahahah…. free market for health care! Good one.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      Ah, the good ol’ days…

  2. avatar matt says:

    “In the course of practicing preventive medicine, health care professionals routinely ask and counsel patients about firearm safety.”

    Really? I’ve never had a doctor ask me that, and don’t think I would unless I walked in with a gun shot wound. And if they’re the type who routinely ask those questions, are they certified instructors? I’d love to sue one for malpractice for providing incorrect or incomplete safety instructions.

    1. avatar matt says:

      And does talking to your doctor now count as “training” for their CCW permit?

    2. avatar Brett says:

      That would not constitute malpractice and you’d be wasting your time.

    3. avatar Chas says:

      If the VPC or Brady Nuts start running TV ads that say “Talk to your doctor about the dangers of gun ownership”, I think my head will explode.

      1. avatar Nathan says:

        Awesome idea, Chad! Let’s see a show of hands for anyone else trying to share their wisdom with the enemies of our 2nd Amendment. Their think tanks must be in overdrive before the upcoming election, maybe you should give them a call…

        Loose lips sink ships… pass it on.

  3. avatar Greg Camp says:

    If my doctor starts in on guns, I’ll see that and raise the total number of deaths due to medical errors.

    1. avatar cmd says:

      Remember, the person who graduated last of their class in medical school is still called Doctor.

      1. avatar matt says:

        And medical schools who accreditation is suspended, still get to teach the kids all ready enrolled, or supposedly thats the way to works with the LCME. To be suspended, that means you had to insufficiently teach prior graduates as well.

  4. avatar Boris says:

    Obamacare will provide.

    1. avatar Hawke says:

      “Obamacare will provide.” What?

      More Medical coverage? Not….
      Lower Medical Coverage Cost? Not…
      Less possibility of me getting asked by a doctor if I properly store and secure my personal firearms? Yes, because I will never be able to get an appointment….

  5. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    I must be lucky. My doctor is in the USAF reserves and carries and my dentist carries as well. IN fact, my dentist took down his no guns signs last year just as I had had enough and decided that the signs were offensive to my rights. When I noticed they were gone and asked, he told me that they were bullshit, his insurance company had required it and he had spent the last several years trying to convince them that under the law here, they were useless. When I mentioned I was looking elsewhere, he showed me he was caring his under his scrubs. I am trying to get my wife to go to him now!

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      Dirk:

      A no gun sign on private property is not an offense to your rights. The property owner has a right to ban guns from his property if he so desires. You corresponding right is to take your business elsewhere.

      1. avatar Bob says:

        Actually a no gun sign on private property IS a violation of your 2A rights, however it is a legal violation. Courts have been forced to make several decisions curtailing/limiting one right when it conflicts with another right. In this case, the courts have ruled that the owner’s property rights trump the gun rights of those visiting him on his property.

        As tdiinva stated, I also have the right to do business wherever and with whomever I choose, so I can take my business where the business owner does not feel the need to use his property rights to temporarily violate my gun rights.

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        I agree that what you stated is the current legal situation. That said, I believe the legal situation is wrong. Private property rights are about the owner being able to keep their property and manage its use. Life rights take precedence over property rights. For example a private property owner who invites you onto his property does not have the right to suddenly kill you because he suddenly decided the color of your shirt was highly objectionable. Along somewhat similar lines, a private property owner cannot execute a trespasser who unwittingly wandered onto their property and posed no threat to the private property owner.

        I believe it is wrong to tell a person they cannot have a holstered handgun on your property because a handgun in a holster poses no danger to their property. Telling a person they cannot have a handgun in a holster, on the other hand, creates danger for the person who wishes to be armed.

      3. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        actually, it is an offense to my rights. Just like a business cannot refuse service to someone they don’t like for race, skin color, gender, I find it offensive that a business can tell me or suggest that I cannot carry when they are engaged in intersate commerce. Moreover, since in Missouri the “prohibition” is only a suggestion unless they see said weapon and refuse to leave when asked, I actually enjoy carrying when the sign suggests otherwise. Now, I agree, true “private property” (ie, someone’s home) means I can’t carry without permission, but to suggest that a business owner’s premises constitues private property for which they can make up their admission rules belittles the civil rights movement and substantial SCOTUS precedent.

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          The 2A does not protect against private discrimination, only against governmental intrusion. PLaws against private discrimination based on race, religion, sex, etc. were imposed on businesses through the commerce clause. In theory, the feds could pass regulations preventing businesses from “discriminating” against gun bearers under its commerce clause authority, but I think it won’t happen in my lifetime.

  6. avatar Brett says:

    I’m a physician and I’d be disappointed if my patients DIDN’T own a gun. I’m sensing a lot of animosity here. Where does the perception come from that doctors would try to impinge upon your gun rights? Your doctor is just as likely to own a gun as you, providing you are in the right section of the country. If you have the misfortune to live in Chicago, LA, or NYC then I could certainly understand the misgivings, but don’t paint us all with the same brush.

    1. avatar Anon in CT says:

      Maybe because so many of the “official” medical groups were so eager to sign onto the Obama agenda? I know that these sorts of groups don’t really represent all physicians, but the perception is there.

    2. avatar Pascal says:

      Brett — there have been other posts here from fellow TTAG posters and I have seen it on other gun boards where doctors have asked and the patients have refused to answer and have subsequently been refused or turned away from medical appointments. Just like we have activist shareholders, activist politicians, activist judges etc., there are activist doctors to care more about gun control than giving proper medical care.

      Here is the thing, if doctors start asking and people start lying to get medical care,what type of doctor patient relationship have we now created?

      I am sure patients lie all the time as the character in “Dr House” likes to say, but it worse if patient and doctor fail to trust each other because now every question may be some way to screw the patient.

      This may lead to issues where someone may have high degree of lead due to poor hygiene after going to range or doing things with guns in an enclosed area. Or hearing loss or other things gun related.

      I would be ok if the discussion was something like, “do you own a gun” — I answer “yes”, and the doc answers “Ok, be sure to was your hands and change your clothes after going to the range” or “make sure you wear eye and hearing protection” or “How long have you been shooting, maybe we should have your hearing checked”

      I don’t want a “guns are bad” speech from doctor or for some doctor to call child welfare services because I am teaching my 8yr old how to clean a gun safely (something I have seen done in CT by a school teacher)

      I have no doubt that there are doctors who carry guns and don’t care, but the activist doctors give all doctors a bad name — and thus to your question — “I’m sensing a lot of animosity here”

      The whole thing is stupid because it changes the relationship with the doctor and what doctors do with no added benefit to health.

      It is a way of “shaming” people away from guns. It is just another anti-gun tactic — public shaming.

    3. avatar Mark says:

      We’re with you doc. The perception that doctors would try to impinge upon patient rights is because of issues with groups encouraging medical professionals to view firearms ownership as a dangerous health issue. As you know, health care professionals are people with conflicting opinions just like any other profession.

  7. avatar Andrew Snyder says:

    When my kids doctor asked I responded “Oh, good point, I should probably look into getting one of those to protect my kids.”

    I didn’t exactly lie, since more = more protection, but they didn’t know how to respond and so just wrote no on the paper.

  8. avatar Matt in FL says:

    I really wish there was a facility for obtaining numbers on stuff that could otherwise likely never be reliably quantified. Some sort of master computer where you could ask things like, “How many doctors regularly ask their patients about guns in the home, anyway?” and get a personal-info scrubbed, non-partisan, no skin in the game answer. Because I’d like to know how big of an “issue” this was. I’m guessing not very. Besides, what kind of idiot doesn’t know how to say “none of your business?”

    “Do you have guns in your home?”

    “Next question.”

    Being an adult is hard.

    1. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

      Here’s where I think the problem might be: people are stupid. Stupid people answer questions without thinking about the consequences. Suddenly medical records contain information about gun owners. Some people are worried (I’m not sure if I agree or disagree) that the .gov could get access to medical records and thereby find out who owns guns.

      1. avatar Anon in CT says:

        “Could”?

        Why do you think that the Feds are giving out billions in grants to convert all medical records into electronic form?

    2. avatar JD says:

      What happened was a patient refused to answer the question and then the doctor refused to serve that patient.

      Other patients of that doctor came forward and said that he recommended that they remove all guns from the home. Not lock them up, but remove them.

      One of the subtexts that wasn’t well covered by the media is that this doctor was one of only a handful of doctors that accepted medicaid in the area. His refusal to serve gun owning clients made it substantially more difficult for them to get taxpayer subsidized health care. There were plenty of other doctors in the area, just not many that accepted medicaid.

      Overall, I’m not shedding any tears for either party. From my perspective both parties are within their rights. The clients just want to get free medical care without a lecture. (which I don’t really have much sympathy for)

  9. avatar Michael B. says:

    Just lie, then go get a new doctor.

  10. avatar Aharon says:

    What make and model gun is that in the photo?

    Last time I was in the hospital, a nurse asked me if there was anyone at home who was a threat to me or if I had ever experienced domestic violence. When I looked at her as if it was a weird question since it had nothing to do with my visit she replied that they are now required to ask it. *eyes rolling here* the latest new new definition of what is also defined as DV can now include extremes such as being disrespectful of one’s spouse and even trying to talk a spouse out of going to visit that person’s parents, relatives, etc. I wonder when Big Brother-Sister is going to install monitoring cameras into our homes?

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      it is a standard question since some women are afraid to seek help. When my wife went to give birth to our oldest, they asked me to leave the room and they asked her that and other questions. When I came back in, she told me the questions they asked out of my presence. The nurse was standing there taking her vitals and I asked my wife, “I hope you told them how I kick you f**king ass every time my dinner isn’t ready.” The nurse had this look of horror on her face and my wife laughed and said “Relax, he’s joking. He wants to piss you off.” I love my wife.

  11. avatar Silver says:

    “None of your damn business.”

    That’s the government for ya, treating all adults as if they’re as dim-witted as Obama voters.

  12. avatar Ralph says:

    I had a gun conversation with one of my doctors (yeah, when you get older, you need whole bunches of physicians). He was very pro-gun. If I had an anti-gun doctor who wanted to discuss the issue with me, I’d probably partake of the opportunity to make him look like an idiot. If he tried to break my balls, I’d tell him to f^ck off and then I’d find another doctor.

    Is it my imagination, or are female physicians less arrogant? I can’t imaging having to tell off a woman doctor.

    1. avatar Aharon says:

      With their patients they are probably a bit less arrogant. Among others in their profession they just as arrogant. In terms of professional entitlement rights for special positions more so.

  13. avatar Accur81 says:

    Make no mistake: Big Brother is now in healthcare, and is not pro-2A.

  14. avatar Bob says:

    If your physician starts to ask you questions about firearms, hand him a “FIREARMS SAFETY COUNSELING REPRESENTATION: PHYSICIAN QUALIFICATIONS AND LIABILITY” form to complete and sign. That will shut him up. In fact, he probably will never ask firearms-related questions of any of his patients again.

    I can’t remember where I found the form. I’ll try to find it online, and post the url for it here.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      That was a lot easier to find than I thought it would be. Here is the url for “FIREARMS SAFETY COUNSELING REPRESENTATION: PHYSICIAN QUALIFICATIONS AND LIABILITY” form

      http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/horn2/Firearms%20Malpractice%20Form.pdf

  15. avatar bontai Joe says:

    THANK YOU! Bob for that form! That is absolutely a GREAT one!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email