Appeals Court Gives Gun Industry Reason to Celebrate

[SecularMotion]

It's a red-letter day for the pro-gun community and boy, are they celebrating the news out of the 11th Circuit. From the NRA to the red-meat blogs, let the word go out: Gun owners don't need to worry any more about those 'nosy' doctors taking away their guns. According to the majority decision written by a judge who was appointed to the Federal bench by Richard Nixon, if a physician in Florida asks a patient whether he owns guns, the physician is violating not only the patient's privacy, he's also not delivering "good medical care."

I thought that how a doctor figured out what to do or say to a patient only became a legal issue if the patient's condition following medical treatment turned worse. And if anyone, including a Federal judge, thinks that a physician can get around the privacy injunctions of HIPAA compliance, better the judge should be laying brick.

Want to make a million dollars in the gun business? Start with two million. The only time gun sales ramp up is when a high-profile shooting creates talk about gun control which provokes all the gun nuts to run into gun shops and buy more guns. Am I saying that the gun industry needs a Sandy Hook from time to time to promote sales? That's exactly what I'm saying. If gun violence really disappeared, the NRA would have a hard time selling the idea that every attempt at reasonable gun restrictions was an attack on our God-given right to defend ourselves with a gun.

The Florida gag law is nothing more than an extension of the attempt to push physicians out of the gun debate because their views on the medical risks of guns were cited by supporters of the Brady bill in 1994. Payback was the NRA's attack on CDC-funded gun violence research, a cynical attempt to silence a professional community whose commitment to patient health required speaking out about the risks of gun access, notwithstanding the fact that patients are always free to reject a physician's advice on any issue related to their health. Judge Tjoflat's statement that a patient is "relatively powerless" and "must submit to a physician's authority" may have been true when he was appointed to the Federal bench 45 years ago, but it's utter crap to promote such nonsense in the current digital age. Or perhaps Tjoflat's never heard of Facebook, Twitter or healthgrades.com.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-weisser/appeals-court-doctors-guns_b_7922552.html

[scscholar]

1. Republicans can't tell doctors how to practice medicine...

I don't understand what you hope to gain by claiming that they can.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. Principles don't apply here; this is different because GUNZ! nt

[branford]

3. I'm not a fan of the decision or the law under the 1A, but the HuffPo editorial is worthless.

For those who are interested, Eugene Volokh, well known First Amendment scholar, has offered a brief analysis of the case.

Note also there's still a chance of an en banc review by the whole 11th Circuit, or even a Petition for Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/29/court-upholds-restriction-on-doctor-patient-speech-about-guns/

[pablo_marmol]

4. A HuffPo article relating to gun legislation is worthless?! SAY IT AINT SO!!!!

And thanks for providing some solid info. on this ruling branford.

[krispos42]

5. The gun industry needs threats to get guns sold.

The ongoing attempts to define and ban "assault weapons" as a knee-jerk reaction by the usual suspects works much better, sells more guns and accessories, and gets gun owners far more motivated than fear of terrorism.

And when you're wringing you hands and bemoaning why oh why don't we have better government, you can look in a mirror for the answer.

That Planned Parenthood bill came damn close to passing today, didn't it? Enjoying all those shuttered clinics in Texas and the Dakotas and Louisiana?

Your culture war is a big part of that. Enjoy the fruits of your effort. Oh, and "Benghazi".

[pablo_marmol]

6. "If gun violence really disappeared, the NRA would have a hard time.......

.......selling the idea that every attempt at reasonable gun restrictions was an attack on our Dog-given right to defend ourselves with a gun."

LMAO! The group that would actually be in trouble would be The Controllers, because no amount of hysterical media support would work at that point.

Any thoughts on what you posted SecMo? (Oh for Pete's sake.....what was I thinking asking?!)