Lots of doctors are against gun ownership. This is because medical textbooks often present gun ownership as some kind of public health problem and typically present a few statistics saying things like you're more likely to die of homicide if guns are in your house than if they're not, you're more likely to commit suicide or have an accident, and so on.

It seems like the American Academy of Pediatrics recently started a campaign to make pediatricians ask parents if they had guns, and if so how many and where are they stored, on the grounds that the kids could be at risk of shooting themselves or having an accident. In Florida the legislature is working on a law that would ban doctors from asking such questions, and then the AAP now has a statement on their website complaining about this.

http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/floridaguns2011.htm



The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) joins the Florida Pediatric Society and other physicians and medical professionals in expressing deep concern over the advancement of Florida Senate Bill 432 and House Bill 155, legislation which would restrict pediatricians' ability to ask patients and parents simple counseling questions about gun safety without fear of sanctions from the state medical board.


I'd urge you to use the Contact Us section of the AAP website to tell them what you think of their anti-gun politics they are trying to take into exam room. I sent them an email earlier today and I hope you will to.

Normally, I am against any gun restrictions to an extent, and yeah it does seem a little stupid for my doctor to waste my precious time in his office with questions about my guns instead of my health, but it also seems kinda stupid that a private doctor would be restricted from asking ANY questions of his patients.

edit:// Yes, docs asking about my guns is a waste of time, but banning said questions from taking place is an even bigger waste of time. I just don't see the problem with it.

Normally, I am against any gun restrictions to an extent, and yeah it does seem a little stupid for my doctor to waste my precious time in his office with questions about my guns instead of my health, but it also seems kinda stupid that a private doctor would be restricted from asking ANY questions of his patients.

edit:// Yes, docs asking about my guns is a waste of time, but banning said questions from taking place is an even bigger waste of time. I just don't see the problem with it.

As a MPH I view this campaign as being part of an effort to stigmatize gun ownership, just as for example cigarette smoking or eating deep fried food has been stigmatized. That is why I feel it is inappropriate to use the authority of the medical establishment in this way.

Ah, I didn't see it that way, you do have a point there.

It seems like the American Academy of Pediatrics recently started a campaign to make pediatricians ask parents if they had guns, and if so how many and where are they stored, on the grounds that the kids could be at risk of shooting themselves or having an accident.

Sounds like a very legitimate concern from where I'm sitting. Your viewpoint that this is discriminatory against gun owners (If I understand your criticism properly) Is clearly not based on a concern for the wellbeing of the patients, but rather for a semi-political personal or community goal for gun acceptance. (or at least, to avoid demonization of guns).

Now, I can understand this on an academic level, though I do not feel encouraged to agree with the opponents to the AAP.

Personally, I think such questions are entirely appropriate for a Doctor to ask their patients, or ask of their patients' parents, and therefore any politicking in the background is well outside of my own level of concern. I'm actually pretty appalled that Doctors questioning patients is the angle of attack chosen by the pro-gun lobbyists, and therefore it's a pretty ridiculous criticism to level at the AAP.

In the United States, 2010, there were 2.6 million crimes attempted in which the victims had to draw or use their gun to prevent the crime. In 95% of these cases, not a single shot was fired. That means that there were 2.6 million crimes prevented by guns, and of those, ironically, 2.47 million were prevented non-violently.

The basic premise is that criminals are criminals, and by definition flout the law. Banning guns only guarantees that law-abiding citizens are less armed than criminals. Take drugs as an example. In the US, on the federal level, they're all illegal, including marijuana. And except in California, Colorado, and perhaps a couple others I'm forgetting, they're illegal on the state level too (in these states, restricted marijuana use is permitted). Not only is their possession illegal, but so is buying, selling, producing, or using them. But they're everywhere nonetheless. Legally banning something doesn't get rid of it, it only means that the criminals have the upper hand.

Personally, I think such questions are entirely appropriate for a Doctor to ask their patients, or ask of their patients' parents.
Just for fun, why? What medical purpose could that knowledge possibly serve?

Just for fun, why? What medical purpose could that knowledge possibly serve?
I would imagine it falls under the “prevention is better than a cure” adage. Why should a doctor ask if a kid is eating vegetables regularly? Why should a doctor ask parents how often they give their children sugary foods? I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with a parent owning a gun, but I do know that it only takes one story of a three year old accidentally shooting his five year old brother to break your heart.

Maybe some doctor somewhere up the chain couldn't down enough Scotch to feel better, so he floated an idea and the Think of the Children™ effect took hold.

Sounds like a very legitimate concern from where I'm sitting. Your viewpoint that this is discriminatory against gun owners (If I understand your criticism properly) Is clearly not based on a concern for the wellbeing of the patients, but rather for a semi-political personal or community goal for gun acceptance. (or at least, to avoid demonization of guns).

Now, I can understand this on an academic level, though I do not feel encouraged to agree with the opponents to the AAP.

Personally, I think such questions are entirely appropriate for a Doctor to ask their patients, or ask of their patients' parents, and therefore any politicking in the background is well outside of my own level of concern. I'm actually pretty appalled that Doctors questioning patients is the angle of attack chosen by the pro-gun lobbyists, and therefore it's a pretty ridiculous criticism to level at the AAP.

I am not saying it is discriminatory, or that is not my main concern. My concern is that it is part of a propaganda war to portray gun ownership as backwards and irresponsible, much like smoking, by using the social authority of doctors.

I think it is a fiendishly brilliant play by anti gun forces because I feel like the most important long term threat to gun ownership is the aging of its supporters and a failure of young people to get into shooting sports and get educated about firearms.

It seems like the American Academy of Pediatrics recently started a campaign to make pediatricians ask parents if they had guns, and if so how many and where are they stored, on the grounds that the kids could be at risk of shooting themselves or having an accident.

As a side note, the AAP has been anti-firearms (my opinion) for many years.

Well, a lot of doctors are. If you read about firearms in medical textbooks they tend to just have a blurb saying how you're more statistically likely to get shot in various circumstances if you have guns in the house than if you don't. Which in my opinion is kind of a dumb thing to say, because any probability of being shot goes up when guns are present versus when they are not present and the probability is therefore zero.

Sounds like a very legitimate concern from where I'm sitting. Your viewpoint that this is discriminatory against gun owners (If I understand your criticism properly) Is clearly not based on a concern for the wellbeing of the patients, but rather for a semi-political personal or community goal for gun acceptance. (or at least, to avoid demonization of guns).

Now, I can understand this on an academic level, though I do not feel encouraged to agree with the opponents to the AAP.

Personally, I think such questions are entirely appropriate for a Doctor to ask their patients, or ask of their patients' parents, and therefore any politicking in the background is well outside of my own level of concern. I'm actually pretty appalled that Doctors questioning patients is the angle of attack chosen by the pro-gun lobbyists, and therefore it's a pretty ridiculous criticism to level at the AAP.

Would you also think it appropriate to ask parents if they have a swimming pool?

Would you also think it appropriate to ask parents if they have a swimming pool?

Or a bathtub? Or electrical outlets in the house? Or carseats/booster seats after measuring how tall the kids are? Or a trampoline? Or liquor/cigarettes? Or bikes (helmets?)Or live near a busy street? Or ever yell at each other in front of the kids, yell at the kids, drink alcohol in front of the kids? Do illegal drugs or abuse prescription drug? Any violent/sexual video games played in your house, sir or Ma'am?

The list goes on and on. I advocate the anyone who wants to have a kid apply for a license, and only granted after thorough genetic, psychological, and means testing as well as a year of training, theory and hands on, with a thorough test at end of said year. Until then everyone should be forced to use contraception. I guess you give the shots to women, don't have one for men yet.

I look to Australia to lead the way on this.

Ben

Would you also think it appropriate to ask parents if they have a swimming pool?

Or a bathtub? Or electrical outlets in the house? Or carseats/booster seats after measuring how tall the kids are? Or a trampoline? Or liquor/cigarettes? Or bikes (helmets?)Or live near a busy street? Or ever yell at each other in front of the kids, yell at the kids, drink alcohol in front of the kids? Do illegal drugs or abuse prescription drug? Any violent/sexual video games played in your house, sir or Ma'am?

Better examples would be a circular saw, Passlode®, or maybe a FuBar™.

Better examples would be a circular saw, Passlode®, or maybe a FuBar™.

I like swimming pool because both a swimming pool and a gun are primarily used for entertainment (yes the gun can be used for self defense, but, really, how much more often do you use one to blow off steam at the range than stop a home invasion) but the swimming pool is many times more dangerous to children than the gun is. Yet no one thinks twice about a having a swimming pool in the same house as kids while the gun is viewed as a deadly attractive nuisance.

I like swimming pool because both a swimming pool and a gun are primarily used for entertainment (yes the gun can be used for self defense, but, really, how much more often do you use one to blow off steam at the range than stop a home invasion) but the swimming pool is many times more dangerous to children than the gun is. Yet no one thinks twice about a having a swimming pool in the same house as kids while the gun is viewed as a deadly attractive nuisance.
I am certainly critical of all attempts to paint correlation as causation, so don't think I'm blindly supporting the AAP here, but there seems to be a lot of false equivocation in this thread.


A swimming pool is not a weapon by design.
A swimming pool is not portable.
A gun is not an environment.
A gun is not a widely recognized source of exercise.
A child can be taught to swim long before he or she is capable of understanding the consequences of lethal weaponry.
A swimming pool is a commonplace sight.
Swimming pools aren't widely portrayed in media as a source of power, respect, or conflict resolution.

A gun is a lethal weapon; that is its purpose. My earlier mention of various construction tools (though it's fair to categorize a FuBar™ as a demolition tool) was intended to provide you and BKR with similarly portable and potentially dangerous objects as a basis of comparison. To compare just any household object to a gun is to gloss over what a gun actually is.