In a blow to feeble-minded gun control advocates the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Wollschlaeger v. Governor of Florida, upheld on July 28, 2015 (for the second time mind you) a Florida law that limits a doctor’s ability to stick their noses into non-medical and unsolicited areas of a patient’s life, effectively ending SpyGate MD.
Some websites have went as far as to claim that this ruling violates the physician’s 1st Amendment right to free speech to talk to their patients about guns, as if patients go to their doctors seeking firearm or political advice, or that physicians are suited to deliver it (ironically one of those such sites is jurist.org no less). Perhaps more ironically, nothing in the law forbids a physician from talking to their patient about guns, only recording that information or using it to discriminate against them. To liberals that must sound un-American that they cannot bully or discriminate against a citizen.
So a doctor has (liberals argue) a first amendment right to engage in politics and tell a paying patient what to do or think outside of medicine? To record non-medical or non-medically relevant information about patients? Outside of the medical scope of the visit? Hmmm. How far will power-hungry progressives go in their quest to control every facet of the people’s lives? Grab a .16 ounce soda (if your town still allows for it) and read on.
In June 2011, Florida correctly passed the Firearm Owners Privacy Act (FOPA) (see the Act here) after it became apparent that some could or were using their position of influence to discriminate against patients who refused to divulge personal, non-relevant information. Amazingly, liberals apparently think these health care providers have a right to your personal information and to discriminate against you based on it (or the lack thereof). Imagine how that kind of power can be abused in the wrong hands.
Important note: no where in this law is a physician forbidden from talking to their patients about firearms.
Here’s the law (HB 155 – Privacy of Firearm Owners), in its short, concise and logical entirety:
“Provides that licensed practitioner or facility may not record firearm ownership information in patient’s medical record; provides exception; provides that unless information is relevant to patient’s medical care or safety or safety of others, inquiries regarding firearm ownership or possession should not be made; provides exception for EMTS & paramedics; provides that patient may decline to provide information regarding ownership or possession of firearms; clarifies that physician’s authority to choose patients is not altered; prohibits discrimination by licensed practitioners or facilities based solely on patient’s firearm ownership or possession; prohibits harassment of patient regarding firearm ownership during examination; prohibits denial of insurance coverage, increased premiums, or other discrimination by insurance companies issuing policies on basis of insured’s or applicant’s ownership, possession, or storage of firearms or ammunition; clarifies that insurer is not prohibited from considering value of firearms or ammunition in setting personal property premiums; provides for disciplinary action.”
Does that sound unreasonable to anyone? Of course not. But read what the liberals write about this law and you’ll see how absolutely silly, petty and misleading they are. How does firearms ownership have anything to do with a physician performing her job? The law clearly allows for common sense exceptions as needed for health, welfare and safety. Where’s the problem? That it doesn’t yield full control and authority to someone else? Liberals will do anything in their power to yield more and more control of every facet of their lives… maybe they just can’t be trusted to themselves.
That article which I referenced earlier also uses potentially misleading data and information to “scare” the weak among them into a false sense of fear (typical for liberals who don’t mind a good truth bender). For example, they wrote that:
“There were 33,636 gun-related deaths and tens of thousands more injuries in the US in 2013“
Sure, there were that many. Unfortunately what they DON’T tell their lessor-capable liberal followers is that out of that whopping, scary, staggering number, only 11,208 were actually homicides, which is easily found out by using the same CDC link that they themselves provided, but the people who liberals feed on aren’t about to check it out themselves; I took the time.
How does 33,636 sound compared to the REAL number of 11,208? Exactly. Yet liberals by the thousands still rant and rave because that’s what they’re told to do and say. But wait for it, soon there will come along a good little liberal in the comments section with the response: “but they were all deaths, does it matter how or why?” Well, yeah! I have a Constitutional Right to own and carry a firearm. You DON’T have a right to drink and drive yet it kills more people. You DON’T have a right to make, sell or use drugs yet it kills more people.
People who saved their own lives (or the life of others) or prevented serious injury with a firearm… THEY MATTER, TOO. But hell no, these blind little sheep won’t think about those lives.
In a shocking report commissioned by the king of control, Obama himself, and issued in 2013 titled “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence” it couldn’t be more clear or backed by more evidence that guns do save real, actual lives. In part, the Obama-ordered CDC study found:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year…
The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.
A different issue is whether defensive use of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self protective strategies.
Hell, almost as many people die from SUFFOCATION in the U.S. each year as die from firearm homicides.
So yes, there are thousands of suicides and accidental deaths every year at the hands of firearms. But people die every day, it’s part of life. Our country was formed in such a way that some present or future U.S. government wouldn’t have the capability of abusing their people without fear of reprisal. We’ve seen government atrocities MANY times across the globe in JUST THE LAST 100 YEARS in which some tyrant abuses the power entrusted to him lawfully by the people. It happens, it’s life, it’s why the founding fathers of America left us safeguards against it.
Remember when the Chinese government cracked down on and brutalized their own people at the Tiananmen massacre. Remember Pelosi speaking out on how the poor defenseless Chinese citizens couldn’t do anything about? Yet SHE would disarm YOU by dismantling our very own safeguards designed for that very purpose. Now stop and REALLY think about that for a moment.
It’s not about today, right now. Once you give up your natural human right to self-defense you cannot get it back. There’s no “I’m sorry” or “do-overs.” Instead of being little sheep maybe this country needs to literally reflect on the bigger issues which have corrupted society and let’s get back to some common sense accountability and responsibility.
Finally, as a capstone to this article, here’s an excerpt from my full length article on gun control, (which you can see here) that further illustrates that out of those yearly firearm homicides, the number excluding gang homicides is actually very low. So enacting guns laws that gangs obviously (even for liberals) won’t obey makes no sense, just ask Chicago how the gun laws are working out.
“… If you want to take this even further, read this article to see how there were really only 2,200 firearm homicides (of all types) in 2010 if you exclude gangs, which we know aren’t about to follow ANY gun laws. So the net result of any gun laws would affect about 2,200 or so non gang member homicides by firearm; a tiny fraction of what the gun control proponents want you to believe because it paints an entirely different picture of the threat.“