mike

“When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t have a gun.” – Former gun dealer Mike Weisser in If Guns Threaten Health Like Smoking or HIV, What Should Doctors Do? [at wbur.org]

94 Responses to Quote of the Day: Healthy Discussion Edition

  1. Well, yes. It’s a calculated risk assumed in order to mitigate another risk. Just like a thousand other calculated risks taken on a daily basis.

    • And you think Mike Weisser or anyone in the anti-2A lobby has any trust in you identifying and mitigating risks? Where did you learn this skill? Where is your government approved instruction course? Where is your learning record? If you can’t have a reasonable discussion about your risk management training then you just leave it with the administration that has time and time again failed at managing their and our risks.

      *foaming at the mouth
      Reasonable discussion (had to throw this in for marketing purposes)

      • So since I actually have training and certificates from government schools and government approved programs in risk analysis and management does that mean I can tell all these people to shut up and go away?

        • No. It would only mean that you are qualified to discuss risk management competently. At least until such a time as you would make it clear that you can’t.

    • I can focus on a minimal risk while ignoring the positive benefits, too! Watch me:

      When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t drink water.

      When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t have a car.

      When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t have children.

    • When is anyone going to be willing to admit that guns are fun? whether you are trying to shatter a flying disc, or sending a projectile the diameter of a pencil several hundred yards away into a circle the size of a half dollar, it’s fun and takes a good amount of skill. Not to mention the hunting sports, providing food for your family. I ‘ve been shooting since I was six. BB guns, .22’s, and up to pistols and deer rifles. The only people I have shot were those I intended to shoot. The most dangerous gun is the unloaded gun…think about it. That’s the one that is always the one that shoots someone.

  2. What about the risk you bring into your life and home by not owning a gun? Can we discuss that? How about the Petit family? What sort of, if any, risk discussion did the now dead women of that family have concerning guns in their home?

    IMHO the benefits of gun ownership far outstrip any risk factors.

    • Exactly. That is what life is all about: weighing the potential risks of something against its potential benefits. IMO the discussion would get much better if both sides would admit THAT(don’t hold your breathe waiting for the antis to admit it)!
      Taking a shower has an element of risk(the tub is where the most home accidents happen), but the benefits of being clean far outweigh them. Everything in life is risk/benefit analysis. Even the antis do it, but without knowing it.

      • …or going in for surgery, or checking in to a hospital in general. Let’s put the body count from medical error (hell, even deaths from correctly given medical treatment) next to the number of people who accidentally shoot themselves.

        Many docs seem to want to only highlight the benefits of medicine without discussing the risks, but turn that around when talking about firearms. But focusing exclusively on the risks of firearms makes them exactly like any other anti.

    • Heck those cheapo fire extinguishers that everyone puts under their kitchen sink are packed full of toxic highly caustic chemicals.

      How many houses actually burn down every year from fires that could be put out by a dinky 1/4lbs fire extinguisher (other than apparently Tyler’s ranch house)? I would wager fewer than are broken into by violent criminals. Does it justify the risk of your kid getting into some seriously dangerous chemicals?

  3. To what end? I’ll admit that the presence of a gun in my home creates a risk that wouldn’t be there in the absence of said gun. I admit the same regarding my car, my bicycle, the bleach in the wash room, an oven that gets hot, having electricity connected to the house, keeping knives and forks in the kitchen, having a power drill in the basement, owning a hot tub and the chemicals to treat said hot tub, burning oil in a furnace to keep warm, living where it gets cold.

    To what end am I admitting this and how does it make me healthier?

    Doctors don’t ever suggest we forgo the automobile trip to their offices. Given the auto accident death rates we’d be safer skipping that routine physical and staying out of our cars. But then how would the doc get paid?

    • And in the middle of all this risk analysis, where the dickens did DOCTORS enter the discussion in the first place? Do they have some manner of magical risk analysis software the rest of us don’t? Doctors need to start standing up and telling the world what their training did NOT prepare them for. The idea that my doctor needs to charge me money to tell me about the risks of firearms really demonstrates the stupidity of those who propose that, and doctors who are not, themselves, stupid, need to forcibly withdraw themselves from that discussion. “Not me! Let the President make a fool of himself, not me!”

  4. “When doctors misuse their patient’s trust to push a political agenda of gun control in the exam room, they’re committing an ethical boundary violation, and that should be illegal.”

    Hear, Hear! Dr. Tim Wheeler

    • Ive met Tim Wheeler. I helped work a CRPA booth at some event or other and he was there helping too.

      He’s 100% a good guy.

      We need more like him.

  5. A motorcycle is a much greater risk. So also is the car. Don’t forget the swimming pool. Bleach is a deadly poison. So is a bottle of anti-freeze. The family dog is a risk. The can of Raid could cause blindness.

    I’m more than willing to talk about legitimate risk. Life is risky. Deal with it. And stop trying to take my stuff.

  6. Since doctors are the new gun experts, maybe I should go to the NRA for my next check up. I mean, it would certainly, DRAMATICALLY reduce my chances of infection and death and let’s be honest, going to a real doctor nowadays brings a risk into your life that doesn’t exist otherwise.

    (^makes as much sense)

    • “Since doctors are the new gun experts…”

      Just like moms were the new gun experts a couple of years ago, when Bloomberg funded MDA, a public-relations effort to make gun-control efforts appear to be wholesome and American (complete with aprons, references to Little League games, BBQs, and flag-themed graphics festooning their anti-firearm propaganda).

      It’s all packaging, and the doctor’s white lab coat is just the new Mom’s apron.

      I am virtually certain that in some closed-door gun-control strategy meeting, some PR genius or marketing guru said, “Since we don’t have any actual data to support our agenda, and we have to get around the reality that crime and firearms-related deaths are decreasing despite ever-increasing numbers of guns being sold, and since the passage of laws allowing legal carry aren’t resulting in the bloodbath we’ve been predicting, and since the whole bloody shirt/for the children thing isn’t working, we need a way to just make people accept our message that all guns are bad without thinking about it. We need an iconic authority figure, someone straight out of Americana, someone people will be afraid to question….how about Moms? Or doctors? Wait, how about both?”

      Bet on it.

    • Medicine is one of the leading causes of preventable death in the USA. And that is using their own numbers, which are likely underreported. Any talk coming from the AMA of the 2A and pubic health is a propaganda ploy, and they know it, they are relying on the publics ignorance to not get called on it.

  7. I wonder if he feels the same way about bathtubs? Cause no one ever drowned in a house with a shower.

    C’mon… Nobody NEEDS a bathtub!

    • Yes, but how many lives have been cut short by slipping and falling in the shower? How many more need to die before we mandate adhesive ducks on the floor of every shower? We need common sense shower safety laws! For the children!

  8. Fair enough, Mr. Weisser. It would allow for a much healthier discussion if you acknowledged that _not_ having a gun in the home also creates a risk that doesn’t exist if you do have a gun; namely that if you are called on to defend your home or anyone in it, you won’t have the means to do so.

    • I think you meant that having a gun readily and instantly accessible with a plan and skills to use it will eliminate a risk inherent in everything from having a gun stored unloaded to not having a plan to not practicing to not owning the gun(s) in the first place.

  9. Everything has some degree of risk. Electric lights are less risky than candles, gas heat and stoves are more convenient, healthier, and safer than wood burning. Living in the dark and eating raw foods has plenty of risk involved. Even immunizations kill a few people annually. By being proficient with the arms we own my wife and I have minimized our risks with firearms, and taken proactive self- protection measures. If anything, that decreases our overall risk factor.

    • Thank you!

      Life is risk. Everything you do carries a risk, even the choice to get out of bed. You could fall and hit your head on a piece of furniture, wall, the floor, or anything else in the room. Not getting out of bed carries the risk of muscle atrophy and bed sores. It’s all risk.

        • Which I used, this very morning, and still managed to cut myself during my high speed morning shave at 0430 hours. I was able to locate the nick quite fast after the sunscreen spray hit it. I’m sure 5 or 6 more warning labels and shaving more rabbit a$$ would greatly enhance my safety.

  10. Doctors should do a damn thing. My guns, my property, I decide what I do with it. You can do what ever you please with your property as long as it doesnt affect me, then we will have issues.

  11. The next time you experience intense, stabbing pain in your abdomen do not consider driving yourself to seek care. I think we can all agree that owning a car is far too dangerous. You are more likely to die on the road than just staying at home and waiting for the pain to pass.

  12. Sure, there is some risk to having a firearm in your home. And there is some risk to having electricity in your home as well. There are also benefits to having firearms and electricity in your home.

    What is of critical importance is that EACH PERSON HAS ACCURATE FACTS AND DATA and that EACH PERSON can decide if the benefits outweigh the risks. The problem with gun grabbers is that they are unwilling to provide accurate facts and data AND they want government to decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks. That is diametrically opposed to everything about the United States.

  13. Going to see a doctor greatly increases you risk of being hurt my malpractice in fact let’s see what is more deadly. Guns or bad docrors.

  14. It is a valid point to discuss and it is a quote pulled from a context that I haven’t had time to look into. I doubt he was saying it was more dangerous than having a swimming pool. I doubt he was saying that if you strictly adhere to the safety guidelines of firearms ownership that there is still risk.

    I look at it as commentary on absolutism when discussing a topic. There is nothing gained by entering a discussion with the mindset that you are unwilling to concede any points or have your mind changed by new information.

    Yes, I agree that owning a firearm makes you more likely to be hurt by a negligent discharge and leaving a firearm to where an uneducated and unsupervised child can get hold of it can also lead to harm. These are risks that do not exist in a home without firearms. Lets talk about how we can better prevent those negligent firearm anomalies. Now, lets have a discussion about if it is a valid use of government resources and power to restrict firearms or is money and time better spent looking into problems like car accidents, swimming pool deaths or sports injuries? Where is the better return on investment?

    I say driving is the most dangerous thing James Yeager does everyday (first person that popped into my head that uses firearms regularly with potentially poorly trained individuals). I also say putting restrictions on firearms ownership is short sighted and a poor use of resources if the end goal is to save more lives and keep individuals healthy. Further, reducing or eliminating the ability for citizens to own firearms will ultimately result in more oppression and harm.

    With all the information I have I would say we (pro-2A) are definitely on the rational side of things and have the facts on our side. But, if we approach every discussion or debate unwilling to discuss and admit the very few negligible shortcomings of firearms ownership how do you expect the other side to give our information a chance to change their minds? It turns into whoever can shout the loudest and I fear we could lose that competition one day.

    Sorry for the wall of text.

    • No, the context is about equating firearm ownership as a health risk so as to create a means of regulating them out if existence.
      You are not seeing similar discussions being prompted about the plethora of other attendant risks. This is a directed effort.

      • That entire article ended with his quote, his voice wasn’t represented at any other time. We don’t know what was said before or after. We are both probably jumping to conclusions but here is my opinion:

        Why aren’t we taking Weisser’s quote as saying its fair to have a discussion about it and not that hes saying a doctor should get involved? He uses the word ‘healthier’ in the context of a discussion, not that firearms ownership or the lack thereof results in a healthier individual.

        • Sorry, I don’t believe it coincidental coming on the heels of a failed nominee to Surgeon General expressing similar views.
          Cynicism has it’s rewards.

    • ” Lets talk about how we can better prevent those negligent firearm anomalies. Now, lets have a discussion about if it is a valid use of government resources and power to restrict firearms or is money and time better spent looking into problems like car accidents, swimming pool deaths or sports injuries? Where is the better return on investment? ”
      Why there is a need for gov to spend money on each of these issue?
      Aren’t we mature enough to know that some activities involve a risk? Where the hell is common sense?
      Why should the gov ever be in the business of protecting us from ourselves?
      By accepting this concept we do open the door for statements like above.
      shame on us for accepting to spend money taken by force from our fellow man to study stupid things that your mom and dad should teach you.

      • “shame on us for accepting to spend money taken by force from our fellow man to study stupid things that your mom and dad should teach you.”
        Hear, Hear!
        I can only add that even if one’s mom and dad neglected to teach him these simple things, he should have learned them on his own. By age 9. The fact that this so-called “gun dealer” doesn’t understand that is probably the big reason he is an EX dealer. If he ever was one in the first place. Who would’ve ever bought anything from this man?

  15. I’m not really interested in a “discussion” on my 2nd. ammendment right, the right for indidviduals to have a gun was settled by Heller case. It has no place as a public or private health issue. Life has risks, period. Deal with it!
    Mr. Weisser, and leave gun owners & our rights alone.

  16. Mr. Weisser’s comment is perfectly valid as a lead-in to a discussion of safe gun storage.

    Those with questions about safe gun storage are advised to contact an NRA certified firearms instructor, not a medical doctor.

  17. Hell, one of the most dangerous activities we partake in each day is….eating!! Look at how many people die from food poisoning complications or excessive caloric intake, not to mention the choking hazards that go hand in hand with eating. I say we ban all eating, starting with the Doctors then. They will be a great example for the rest of us. I say stay the hell out of my interests in the guise as being “healthy” an idea conjured up by the good folks at the Federal Guv’ment. We are all intelligent humans here, and we are a free people so deal with it or find other easy work.

  18. this all stems from that BS stat the antis always cite that says you’re X times more likely to shoot a family member than an intruder….even though that stat includes all intentional murders/DV situations/etc/etc

    Since i’m not some loser who wants to murder his own family, i’m fairly confident i am not increasing my risk of killing a loved one MORE than i am decreasing my risk of being killed by an intruder…

  19. Without ammo, a gun is no more of a risk than your average paperweight.
    Without someone pulling the trigger of a loaded gun, it is usually no more dangerous than your average paperweight.
    Perhaps Mr. Weisser should realize that the real risk is that there are people in the equation. People do stupid things, mean things, clutzy things, people are our number one risk factor. That should be clear to anyone that has ever driven a car on a public road. I’m not in favor of banning people (even certain groups of people). I’d rather manage the risks intelligently. One of the ways I do that is to be prepared to defend myself, my family & my community.

  20. By not bringing a firearm into the home, and developing profiency in its use and handling, you’re leaving your home and life exed to a known and major risk, without effective mitigation. It’s not only naive, but reckless, to leave your family’s safety in the hands of fate, the police, or your own hand-to-hand combat skills.

    Before anything is said or done, it would be a more healthy discussion if people didn’t rudely demand that others automatically agree with their own narrow, pre-conceived notions about the subject.

  21. “When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t have 9 volt batteries.”

  22. No. You don’t understand. Guns are a disease vector. Guns have the power to infect the human mind with the desire to go out and commit murder.

    It is more than just having physical contact to pass on the disease like other disease vectors. No, just the sight of a gun can have this effect. This is a why a picture of a gun with a circle and slash through it has the power to stop mad men with a gun from entering a GFZ.. It is not just like magic, it is magic.

    Doctors are trained professionals. They are like gods in the power they have in their hands and their minds. We should listen to their pronouncements as if they are from god himself.

    ( as a disclaimer, this is the viewpoint of many of the state worshiping acolytes. It is obvious this type of person is in an emotionally arrested state of a child; immature and infantile. They believe in the power of wishful and magical thinking.)

  23. This “risk” talk goes with the “reasonable” and “common sense” talk. It’s only a ploy to get you to nod and agree there’s a risk. Once you agree, the antis respond with “Good, now we get rid of guns!”
    Life is full of risks. We’re more likely to die in a car accident then from being shot in our house. This sort of ploy assumes all risks are equal, and any risk needs to be eliminated.
    It brings to mind the joke of the scientist that computed the risk of having a bomb om a plane. Concerned he drove. His friend did the same and the computed the risk of having two bombs on the plane. Finding the risk was much lower then driving, he brought his own bomb on the plane.

  24. well, that’s true. just like its true that I am adding risk if I put in a swimming pool, or if I get behind the wheel of a car, etc… But, quite frankly, that’s my choice and my business, and I’m not conceding that personal responsibility/decision making to you or anyone else.

    If you don’t want to own a weapon, than don’t. I respect that.

  25. Looking at his photo, perhaps his doctor should place him somewhere far away from groceries, heart disease kill more than guns every year.

  26. Living free entails risk. Anything could happen at any time, and we all meet the same ends. Maybe we would have a healthier discussion if everyone could accept that and allow people to live their lives in their pursuit of happiness.

  27. Oh no he di’n’t?!
    The comments pretty much cover the rational response.
    “Robin, do you have anything to add?”
    “No…no I don’t”

  28. It’s called life, everyday it’s a gamble…

    That turkey neck action he has going on tells me he likes to gamble with the buffet.

  29. The title of the sources article answers itself. “If Guns Threaten Health Like Smoking or HIV, What Should Doctors Do?”

    The likelihood of developing health problems from smoking is exponentially greater than the risk posed by gun ownership. I’m pretty sure the same goes for STD’s.

    It sets up a false equivalency. They ask “If…” But since gun ownership is not as dangerous as cancer and HIV then nothing should be done.

    Perhaps what the article should have been titled “If Guns Threaten Health Like Gas Heaters or Blow Driers Used Around Sinks, What Should Doctors Do? “

  30. This man’s mentality sums up the 21st century progressive outlook well. As a sort of foundation, they want to live in a world where even the slightest risk of coming into contact with something they don’t like, disagree with, or are afraid of doesn’t exist, which is juvenile to begin with. The ideology splits off into two camps from there. I have a somewhat left-leaning lady friend who is surrounded by gun owning buddies of both genders, yet has absolutely no desire to own one herself or even go shooting. So one day I asked why not and she replied:
    “[Milsurp], I’m just not interested and honestly, I don’t think I’m emotionally mature enough to own a gun yet. Please don’t take it personally.”
    “Okay that’s fine, not everyone feels comfortable around guns. But do you want to actively prevent other people from owning them because you don’t trust yourself?”
    “Oh heavens no, that’s like a schizophrenic trying to rationalize their disorder and make themselves feel normal. Buy all the guns you want, just don’t bug me about going shooting with you or expect me to enjoy talking about them in detail.”

    This is a sign of major improvement, because she’s accepted that the world has stuff she won’t always agree with but also doesn’t affect her directly, so she just needs to take it in stride. The other camp, the adolescent ones like this guy, can’t jump that hurdle. They want to deny everyone else access to something because they’re either afraid of it or don’t trust themselves around it without strict government controls and, knowing their fears are abnormal, want to make themselves seem normal by completely changing the world around them at everyone else’s expense.

  31. What Weisser and others are talking about is called the “medicalization of deviance”. Step one is to identify an observed behavior as “deviant’ making it dangerous, immoral, threatening the general good, etc. In this case, gun-ownership is seen as pathological, something so dangerous that it always leads to increased mortality. Step two involves describing the “mortality pathologies” related to gun ownership as demanding immediate medical intervention—supported, of course, by appropriate laws designed to prevent gun owners from harming themselves or others. Let’s do it for the children.

  32. In spite of many years of formal edumaction, many doctors don’t understand basic statistics…
    Try this yourself:

    Doctors flunk quiz on screening-test math

    “Of 61 physicians, hospital staff and medical students asked, “If a test to detect a disease whose prevalence is 1 out of 1,000 has a false positive rate of 5 percent, what is the chance that a person found to have a positive result actually has the disease?” only 14 gave the correct answer….”
    (Scroll down for the correct answer.)

    https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/doctors-flunk-quiz-screening-test-math







    — 2 percent.

    Statistical Literacy Among Doctors Now Lower Than Chance

    “Good news! 42% of doctors can correctly answer a true-false question on p-values! That’s only 8% worse than a coin flip! “

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/17/statistical-literacy-among-doctors-now-lower-than-chance/

  33. Tell ya what, Mikey, when you go after:

    – swimming pools
    – tubs
    – household cleaners and poisons
    – vehicles

    with equal fervor, then you *might* garner a bit of attention and earn some respect in this matter. Until then, shut your pie hole.

  34. “When all is said and hope and change promises didn’t get done, things will go much easier when you admit you are inviting a risk to your health (Obamacare, DHS Mraps and SWAT gear for all…)and freedom (ATF F&F, IRSgate) when you elect a Democrat into your congressional or Executive seat of power, state or federal.”

  35. OK, I have admitted I am greater risk of incurring a GSW by having a gun in my house than by not having one present in my house (where the chance is zero obviously). Can we have that conversation now that you antis so badly want? Every time we try to converse we seem to be getting shut out for some reason.

    • Just because YOU don’t bring one into your home doesn’t mean someone else won’t. And I’d be more worried about the gun someone else brings in than about one you brought in… So that “additional risk” isn’t even valid once all the factors are considered.

  36. While possibly not intended by the author, AIDS is a terrific example to follow. The solution was largely based on a widespread public information campaign to educate the population about the disease and how to mitigate the risk factors. Huge amounts of time in money were poured into all levels of the education system to reduce the risk of ignorance perpetuating future risks. Sounds like a great way to approach firearms. Educate children and adults about them and the proper way to handle them (or not handle them) as the situation merits.

    On a side note, my first thought when thinking about doctors getting involved was getting some medicinal MJ for my Glockoma, lol.

  37. What about that steak knife set you got for Christmas? Is that a health risk that doctors should be aware of and talk to you about? I’ve had friends cut themselves badly enough to require an ER trip.

    My Dad cut his finger pretty badly and had to get stitches when working on a vacuum cleaner (it turned on before his fingers were out of the way of the fan). Are vacuum cleaners a health risk too?

    I’ve heard of many more people cutting themselves on household tools or objects than I have heard accidentally shoot themselves with a gun. The whole “you’re bringing something dangerous into your home!” argument is ridiculous as long as houses aren’t run like asylums.

  38. Does anyone on here know what ACCIDENTAL gun violence is as stated in the article? Is that when a criminal shoots his partner or is it when they accidentally commit armed robbery and get shot by their intended victims.
    The other interesting point was that guns make suicide more successful, which I don’t really see what is wrong with weak minded and weak willed people being good at a least one thing in their last cowardly act.
    The joy to be an American with liberal teachers traumatizing and indoctrinating our kids over zero tolerance and pop tarts to liberal doctors trying to turn gun ownership into a disease. A disease so devastating to all Americans that it can be classified as a public health crisis only to be cured through governmental intervention, for our health and public safety of course.

  39. It seems that mikethegunguy has given up on retail altogether. I wonder where his pay checks come from now? Being a gun dealer is hard work and margins are slim. Being a mouthpiece for billionaire douchebags probably s a wise career move for him.
    I’m still waiting for the media to descend on him for calling Colion Noir the NRA’s ‘House Ni&&ER’ . I guess only conservatives can be racist.

  40. I wonder what he would have to say about building a swimming pool… Or keeping my hammers and baseball bats inside the house….and these damn hands and feet attached to my body….WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE.

    twit.

  41. When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you don’t have a gun.”

    In my opinion, if you have to use a double negative to make your point, then you’re on very shaky philosophical ground indeed.

    Example: Do you like Sushi? I don’t not like it.

    Huh?

    Besides, you can substitute the word “gun” for many other things in the home, as has been amply pointed out by others. Difference is, there’s no constitutional right to keep and bear a candle, or a pool, or a ladder, or a baseball bat, etc…

    Nice try, old timer, now go back to your gun free rest home and keep quiet.

  42. When all is said and done it would be a much healthier discussion if everybody was willing to admit that you are bringing a risk into your home and your life that doesn’t exist if you have a gun.

Leave a Reply

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