OT: Asked if I had a gun in my home during physical.

[roster]

[NotMuffy]

Well, if one of those Democrats decides to run for President, simply don't vote for them.

And hopefully, they will produce their birth certificates (or whatever appropriate documents) before the primaries...

[archangle]

I really hope that one of Marion's children, grandchildren, whoever is not seriously injured or killed in a firearms accident.

Are you sure you wouldn't gloat and try to use it to further your agenda? And then try to recruit Marion to publicly come over to your side? You'd be in the minority of anti-gun people if you didn't.

[roster]

I really hope that one of Marion's children, grandchildren, whoever is not seriously injured or killed in a firearms accident.

Seriously. I really mean that.

I am sure she uses locks for safety with guns and kids in the house.

[NotMuffy]

I really hope that one of Marion's children, grandchildren, whoever is not seriously injured or killed in a firearms accident.

Are you sure you wouldn't gloat and try to use it to further your agenda?

Yes.

I am in a position to have seen tragic accidents happen to children and understand, usually only in a fleeting moment, of how truly horrible they can be.

[BernieRay]

It's too bad that we don't have a single person as the root cause for this. Between a lack of personal responsibility and minding one's own business, we've become a society of victims that need to be taken care of.

I grew up around firearms and was taught safety before the age of 4. I'm still around. I guess there's something to be said for having responsible parents, huh?

[So Well]

Between a lack of personal responsibility and minding one's own business, we've become a society of victims that need to be taken care of.

Yes, like BernieRay needs the Florida state government to pass a law prohibiting doctors from asking him a certain question. BernieRay is a victim who can't handle his doctor's questions himself so he asks the government to take care of it for him.

This is encouraging to see: Florida Bill Would Prohibit Doctors From Asking Patients About Their Guns.

[NightMonkey]

I grew up around firearms and was taught safety before the age of 4. I'm still around. I guess there's something to be said for having responsible parents, huh?

Only a total idiot and total idiot parents would think a 3-year old could understand gun safety.

[BernieRay]

I feel sorry, truly, for people who are only able to respond with name calling and distortions of other people's views because they lack the ability to respond in a more civil manner. I'll try not to pick on you, okay, since your buttons are so easily pushed.

[Kilgore Trout]

3) Do I have a gun in my home? Answer: No

Suggested responses:

1. No, it's at work. I'll be on the news tonight!

2. If you're worried about having to test me for lead poisoning, I'll point out the lack of massive blood loss...

3. They asked me the same thing at my anger management class. Once.

4. Nope, the gun show's right here! *flex biceps*

5. The streets will run red with the blood of the non-believers; the time of vindication is neigh!

6. What, you think my cat's going to protect my stash?

In all honestly, I've never been asked that. Probably a good thing too.

[PST]

The actual text of the bill passed in Florida can be found at http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/ ... ssion=2011. I don't think the governor has signed it yet. You may be surprised at what a mushy puddle of ambiguous legislative slop this is. It reads as if it were designed to let those who voted for it tell those who asked for such a bill, "we did it!" while at the same time reassuring doctors that there are so many hedges and exceptions that they don't have to worry. Read the whole thing. One or two paragraphs don't do it justice, but these are especially ripe:

A health care practitioner … shall respect a patient's right to privacy and should refrain from making a written inquiry or asking questions concerning the ownership of a firearm or ammunition by the patient or by a family member of the patient, or the presence of a firearm in a private home or other domicile of the patient or a family member of the patient. Notwithstanding this provision, a health care practitioner or health care facility that in good faith believes that this information is relevant to the patient's medical care or safety, or the safety of others, may make such a verbal or written inquiry.

The standard is completely subjective. The doctor just has to believe in good faith that the question is relevant to the patient's medical care or safety. I would imagine that anyone who asks the question probably believes that. Someone who doesn't believe that probably "should refrain" from asking such a question. The following section is almost as perfect:

A patient may decline to answer or provide any information regarding ownership of a firearm by the patient or a family member of the patient, or the presence of a firearm in the domicile of the patient or a family member of the patient. A patient's decision not to answer a question relating to the presence or ownership of a firearm does not alter existing law regarding a physician's authorization to choose his or her patients.

That section seems to say that both the patient and the doctor are free to do whatever they could have done anyway if the section had never passed.

So this law is really only symbolic. If you are a legislator, it gives you a chance to let the NRA know you're still their pal without pissing off doctors too much.

I agree with So Well on this one. Naturally that makes me uneasy, but I consulted with a doctor (Ron Paul, of course) and the ghost of William F. Buckley, and they assure me that So Well is absolutely right. Telling doctors what they have to ask and telling them what they can't ask are two sides of the same coin. This bill would never have been proposed except for an anonymous anecdote about a doctor who allegedly would not take on a new patient because of refusal to answer a gun question. They probably wouldn't have gotten along anyway. That kind of occasional, slightly annoying incident is a sad excuse for passing a hermaphroditic law like this one.

[So Well]

I agree with So Well on this one. Naturally that makes me uneasy, but I consulted with a doctor (Ron Paul, of course) and the ghost of William F. Buckley, and they assure me that So Well is absolutely right. Telling doctors what they have to ask and telling them what they can't ask are two sides of the same coin.

Congratulations. If you can understand one issue of individual freedom and limited government, it is an easy transition to begin to understand all issues of individual freedom and limited government.

[matt2401]

Guys and Gals,

Take a deep breath on this one. Asking about firearm ownership is not any sinister plot.

First a little background, I am have a valid CCW and I am ICU nurse and I used to be a paramedic. I staunchly support 2nd amendment rights as well as see it from the public health aspect.

Primary care physicians are trained and encouraged to ask screening questions as an overall measure of health and safety. Asking about seat belt usage is one example, smoking is another. Asking about gun ownership is more relevant to parents, especially if it includes referrals for gun locks. As a paramedic I ran on a child victim of an accidental shooting, and I support any efforts to avoid tragedies like that in the future. Knowing that someone has a firearm also would be relevant if a patient is found to be suicidal or has some other serious mental issue. Will asking someone catch many people who might otherwise commit suicide? No, but its low hanging fruit and worth attempting.

As for the Florida law, don't be so judgemental about the changes. The way the original bill was written it would have been illegal for a paramedic walking into the scene of a domestic violence act where any firearms are. That restriction was ridiculous and was always part of my scene safety when on scene of a violent call. In my current role of a nurse we ask every patient if they have any thoughts on harming themselves or others. If yes the follow up question is "do you have any plans to carry out". Again, the way the bill was written I could have been charged depending on how that patient answered.

If you are asked a question you don't want to answer, don't answer! No need for a law to protect feelings. Just understand there are good intentions behind these questions.

[PST]

As for the Florida law, don't be so judgemental about the changes. The way the original bill was written it would have been illegal for a paramedic walking into the scene of a domestic violence act where any firearms are. That restriction was ridiculous and was always part of my scene safety when on scene of a violent call. In my current role of a nurse we ask every patient if they have any thoughts on harming themselves or others. If yes the follow up question is "do you have any plans to carry out". Again, the way the bill was written I could have been charged depending on how that patient answered.

I am not complaining that the law was watered down. I agree that in its original form it was dangerous, now it is mostly just silly. When issues like these were raised, the best course for the legislature would have been to forget the whole thing, not add exceptions to an unnecessary law.

[fuzzy96]

the best course for the legislature would have been to forget the whole thing, not add exceptions to an unnecessary law.

now come on . these politicians need something to do. somehow they need to justify thier saleries expense accounts and automatic pension plans. really running the government wehether it be state local or federal should only necessitate a part -time legislature. just call the bad politics and such as self imposed job security