AMA Pushes 'Unprecedented' Gun Control Agenda As Congress Dithers

[thackney]

AMA Pushes 'Unprecedented' Gun Control Agenda As Congress Dithers
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2018/05/27/ama-pushes-unprecedented-gun-control-agenda-as-congress-dithers/#5119e7a469ef


Bruce Japsen , CONTRIBUTOR
I write about healthcare business and policy 
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
TWEET THIS
the AMA’s policy-making House of Delegates will consider nearly a dozen proposals on gun control and public safety
 
Staff and students comfort each other outside Noblesville West Middle School after a shooting at the school May 25, 2018 in Noblesville, Indiana. (Photo: Kevin Moloney/Getty Images)

Physician members of the American Medical Association are pushing the nation’s largest doctor group to back an “unprecedented” number of measures designed to curb gun violence and coax Congress into action.

Early next month, the AMA’s policy-making House of Delegates will consider nearly a dozen proposals on gun control and public safety measures in the wake of 28 school shootings this year alone including last week's at Noblesville West Middle School in Indiana. Action at the AMA meeting, which runs June 9-13 in Chicago, will put the group’s considerable lobbying clout behind legislation heading into November’s mid-term elections when gun control measures are expected to be key issues.

“Gun violence in America today is a public health crisis, one that requires a comprehensive and far-reaching solution,” AMA president Dr. David O. Barbe said. “This is an important issue, as demonstrated by an unprecedented number of gun violence prevention proposals that physicians have submitted for discussion during the upcoming AMA policy-making meeting.”

[thackney]

How about working on a greater cause of death?

The third-leading cause of death in US most doctors don't want you to know about
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/22/medical-errors-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-america.html

A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. Other reports claim the numbers to be as high as 440,000.

Medical errors are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

Advocates are fighting back, pushing for greater legislation for patient safety.

[txradioguy]

Congress needs to get off their ass (yea yeah I know) and do something to strengthen 2A protections.  The gun grabbers aren't resting and before we know it...the anti 2A types and all their well funded organizations will have gutted the 2A before Conservatives and the GOP know what hit them.

[driftdiver]

Congress needs to get off their ass (yea yeah I know) and do something to strengthen 2A protections.  The gun grabbers aren't resting and before we know it...the anti 2A types and all their well funded organizations will have gutted the 2A before Conservatives and the GOP know what hit them.

@txradioguy
There were bills in the House which would have strengthened the 2A (Reciprocity) but then a well timed school shooting killed all support for it and Ryan pulled the bill.

[txradioguy]

@txradioguy
There were bills in the House which would have strengthened the 2A (Reciprocity) but then a well timed school shooting killed all support for it and Ryan pulled the bill.

@driftdiver

Another reason why Ryan needs to go.  We need (and probably won't get) a Speaker that won't wither in the face of the gun grabbers and their scary rhetoric.

[endicom]

Something like one quarter of MDs are AMA members. The membership has long been dwindling.

[mountaineer]

How about working on a greater cause of death? ...

A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. Other reports claim the numbers to be as high as 440,000.

Medical errors are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

Not to mention deadly infections like MRSA and staph that hospital patients so often acquire, thanks to poor hygiene on the part of hospital employees.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Went to my cardiologist a few months ago and filled out a form with his outfit. They wanted me to state whether there were guns in the house.  I skipped it.

Like that was a medical condition.

[driftdiver]

Keep in mind your doctor can effectively remove your 2a rights.   If they decide you are unstable and a danger to those around you or yourself.

[Jazzhead]

Keep in mind your doctor can effectively remove your 2a rights.   If they decide you are unstable and a danger to those around you or yourself.

Is it your view that an individual who is "unstable and a danger to himself and those around him" should be able to have a gun?   

[thackney]

Is it your view that an individual who is "unstable and a danger to himself and those around him" should be able to have a gun?

Is there due process with that and an established method to dispute and remove that claim?

Or does that doctor check a box and notify police to come take your property without notice?

Does that person still get to drive their car?

[txradioguy]

Went to my cardiologist a few months ago and filled out a form with his outfit. They wanted me to state whether there were guns in the house.  I skipped it.

Like that was a medical condition.

For awhile they were asking kids about whether there were guns in the house during medical visits.

I told mine that if they were asked that question to tell the doctor to ask me and/or their mom.

[txradioguy]

Is it your view that an individual who is "unstable and a danger to himself and those around him" should be able to have a gun?

How is your eye doctor qualified to make that determination?  Or your internal medicine doctor?

[driftdiver]

Is it your view that an individual who is "unstable and a danger to himself and those around him" should be able to have a gun?

@Jazzhead
Its my view that if a person is going to lose their 2a rights because they are dangerous that the decision should be made in a court of law.   NOT from a single individual who may have a political agenda they are pushing.

Do you feel people have a right to a fair hearing in a court of law before their rights are revoked without due process?

[skeeter]

Is it your view that an individual who is "unstable and a danger to himself and those around him" should be able to have a gun?

Heavens no. Nor should they have access to sleeping pills, lengths of rope or sharp objects either. Will the doctor be asking about those objects as well?

[thackney]

@Jazzhead
Its my view that if a person is going to lose their 2a rights because they are dangerous that the decision should be made in a court of law.   NOT from a single individual who may have a political agenda they are pushing.

 

And if they are a real danger to themselves and others, a gun isn't the only concern with this individual.

[driftdiver]

And if they are a real danger to themselves and others, a gun isn't the only concern with this individual.

I also believe that if a person isn't safe to own a firearm then perhaps they shouldn't be on the street.   There are plenty of other weapons available let alone the possibility of them..... GASP....... illegally possessing a firearm.

[driftdiver]

@Jazzhead
Why don't you believe in due process?

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Its my view that if a person is going to lose their 2a rights because they are dangerous that the decision should be made in a court of law.   NOT from a single individual who may have a political agenda they are pushing.

Do you feel people have a right to a fair hearing in a court of law before their rights are revoked without due process?

@driftdiver    Of course I agree with that.  The individual must be afforded due process.  Your original statement was that "your doctor can effectively remove your 2A rights".   Obviously,  a doctor cannot do that by himself, but his expert opinion may well form the basis for a court's decision.

My question went to the threshold issue of whether an individual who is unstable and a danger to himself or others should be able to have a gun.   You haven't answered that.   But that first question must be addressed before proceeding to the questions regarding how instability is determined and what proof must be provided in order to take a gun away.   

Assuming that you agree that an unstable/dangerous person should not have a gun,  what in your view is the role to be played by expert medical opinion in reaching that determination? 

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Why don't you believe in due process?

Where the hell are you getting that from, @driftdiver ? 

[driftdiver]

@driftdiver    Of course I agree with that.  The individual must be afforded due process.  Your original statement was that "your doctor can effectively remove your 2A rights".   Obviously,  a doctor cannot do that by himself, but his expert opinion may well form the basis for a court's decision.

My question went to the threshold issue of whether an individual who is unstable and a danger to himself or others should be able to have a gun.   You haven't answered that.   But that first question must be addressed before proceeding to the questions regarding how instability is determined and what proof must be provided in order to take a gun away.   

Assuming that you agree that an unstable/dangerous person should not have a gun,  what in your view is the role to be played by expert medical opinion in reaching that determination?

@Jazzhead
Depends on your definition of "unstable".   This issue has been abused by governments throughout history to control people they don't like.

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Depends on your definition of "unstable".   This issue has been abused by governments throughout history to control people they don't like.

If you are concerned with government "controlling people they don't like", then it seems to me you ought to agree that instability should be addressed by expert medical opinion, especially the opinion of the individual's own physician.   

[Applewood]

Something like one quarter of MDs are AMA members. The membership has long been dwindling.

My primary physician has a few choice words for the AMA.  Get him started and you will hear a barrage of nasty words that will curl your hair. 

Doc blames the AMA for Obamacare and all the headaches that go with it. 

[roamer_1]

My question went to the threshold issue of whether an individual who is unstable and a danger to himself or others should be able to have a gun.   You haven't answered that.

@Jazzhead
No, that really isn't the question... The question is, how the hell are you going to stop him from owning a gun, even if he shouldn't?

[driftdiver]

If you are concerned with government "controlling people they don't like", then it seems to me you ought to agree that instability should be addressed by expert medical opinion, especially the opinion of the individual's own physician.   

@Jazzhead
In this case the doctor has the legal authority to withdraw a persons 2A amend rights without due process.   It seems you support that current process.