Docs v. Glocks Upheld in Florida

Jun 2014
61,933
36,367
Cleveland, Ohio
First, a personal note. I acknowledge the 2nd Amendment rights of my neighbors and I oppose gun laws that seem to me to infringe on those rights without adequate cause.

That said, some "gun control laws" are clearly in the public interest, clearly constitutional and clearly should enjoy the support of everyone (except those who plan to use guns to commit crimes.)

Here's a twist: a "gun law" that is both clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL and highly detrimental to public safety, which should NOT have been upheld. In an indulgence of the NRA's paranoia, the state of Florida made it illegal for a doctor to ask a patient about guns in the home, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has just upheld this law. The law is meant to address the COMPLETELY BASELESS FEAR that if gun ownership is noted in medical records, HIPPA laws will not be adequate to keep the government from using that data when and if it ever decides to "go rouge" and begin confiscating guns in private hands.

Federal court upholds Florida's docs vs. glocks law | cleveland.com

So, balanced against this chimera of paranoia, the medical profession in Florida has lost significant free speech rights and what may be worse, the right to try and avert tragedies such as children playing with guns, shootings by violent spouses, shootings by disturbed teens, etc. Doctors found to have violated this "gag law" will have their medical licenses revoked. I'm not sure what Florida expects doctors to do if patients themselves express concerns about guns in their home -- run out of the room?

Gun rights advocates are quick to point out the irrational fears that drive bad gun laws that lack any real life value, and I do join them in that effort. But this kind of knee-jerk opposition to any "burden" on gun rights is so preposterous as to call into question the judgment of those same gun rights advocates -- who want the rest of us to feel we can trust their maturity and judgment.

SHAME on Florida, the 11th Circuit and on the NRA -- and shame on any gun rights advocate who does not denounce this dangerous, intrusive and completely unnecessary law.
 
Jun 2010
7,530
1,554
Ohio
First, a personal note. I acknowledge the 2nd Amendment rights of my neighbors and I oppose gun laws that seem to me to infringe on those rights without adequate cause.

That said, some "gun control laws" are clearly in the public interest, clearly constitutional and clearly should enjoy the support of everyone (except those who plan to use guns to commit crimes.)

Here's a twist: a "gun law" that is both clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL and highly detrimental to public safety, which should NOT have been upheld. In an indulgence of the NRA's paranoia, the state of Florida made it illegal for a doctor to ask a patient about guns in the home, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has just upheld this law. The law is meant to address the COMPLETELY BASELESS FEAR that if gun ownership is noted in medical records, HIPPA laws will not be adequate to keep the government from using that data when and if it ever decides to "go rouge" and begin confiscating guns in private hands.

Federal court upholds Florida's docs vs. glocks law | cleveland.com

So, balanced against this chimera of paranoia, the medical profession in Florida has lost significant free speech rights and what may be worse, the right to try and avert tragedies such as children playing with guns, shootings by violent spouses, shootings by disturbed teens, etc. Doctors found to have violated this "gag law" will have their medical licenses revoked. I'm not sure what Florida expects doctors to do if patients themselves express concerns about guns in their home -- run out of the room?

Gun rights advocates are quick to point out the irrational fears that drive bad gun laws that lack any real life value, and I do join them in that effort. But this kind of knee-jerk opposition to any "burden" on gun rights is so preposterous as to call into question the judgment of those same gun rights advocates -- who want the rest of us to feel we can trust their maturity and judgment.

SHAME on Florida, the 11th Circuit and on the NRA -- and shame on any gun rights advocate who does not denounce this dangerous, intrusive and completely unnecessary law.
Nothing irrational about this fear.

Some gun owners have already had their firearms stripped away and their guns siezed after making casual comments to doctors during examination. Such as one man in Tennessee who commented to his doctor that a bad bout of asthma caused him so much pain he came as close as he ever had to considering suicide. Next thing you know the court orders his firearms siezed based on the doctors testimony.

Doctors have no valid medical reason to ask such things.

Shame on any fool who supports this immoral law
 
Jun 2014
61,933
36,367
Cleveland, Ohio
Nothing irrational about this fear.

Some gun owners have already had their firearms stripped away and their guns siezed after making casual comments to doctors during examination. Such as one man in Tennessee who commented to his doctor that a bad bout of asthma caused him so much pain he came as close as he ever had to considering suicide. Next thing you know the court orders his firearms siezed based on the doctors testimony.

Doctors have no valid medical reason to ask such things.

Shame on any fool who supports this immoral law
First, there does not need to be a "medical reason" for anything a doctor says, inside or outside a consultation room. We do not test freedom of speech by evaluating whether we all agree that the speech in controversy is "necessary", as should be painfully obvious from the Westboro Baptist Church decision. You and your doctor probably chit-chat a bit at the start of every consultation; is this speech that can be constitutionally regulated, IYO?

Second, I think the best person to gauge whether a question has medical value is MY DOCTOR, not the local used car dealer I elected as my state representative, not the LAWYERS on the Florida Supreme Court or the LAWYERS on the 11 Circuit. So for example, a doctor might note my serious interest in gardening and, remembering this, ask me about certain plants if he sees a symptom he thinks may indicate an adverse reaction. The reason I pay my doctor for care is because he knows medicine better than I do, and I want him to be free to use that knowledge.

The OBVIOUS value of this now-illegal speech is that doctors can prevent tragedies, by educating gun owners with small children about safe storage (if they wish), or by counseling the parents of disturbed teens to lock up or get rid of guns, etc.

The scenario you described is legally impossible, as Tennessee has no gun restraining order law but does have, like every state, a very strong doctor-patient confidentiality law. A doctor could have a patient he feared was suicidal picked up and held for observation, but at this time, not even California has a law that would allow him to ask the police to confiscate the guns of a disturbed patient.

If it actually happened -- and I would need to see a link to a reputable news report to believe it did -- then the patient has a lawsuit against BOTH the doctor and the police for violating his rights. We do not need to gag ALL doctors merely because one violated confidentiality. We already have an adequate remedy for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person