They certainly would be if they said that no parent should own a pool or own a car, yes.
I assume you simul-posted over my last post. You willing to retract now?
I’m reading their "where we stand page and it gets even better.
Yes, they are anti-gun. It’s amazing that people are seriously disputing this.
Not denying, simply wondering how this dreadful state of affairs came to be. According to you, that is.
Do you similarly disfavor laws specifically exempting pharmacists from employer requirements to dispense certain medicines?
A doctor asking about a new parent’s gun safety isn’t anti-gun. Any more than asking about outlet covers is anti-electricity.
I will grant that the position of the organization is fairly anti-gun. Which has nothing to do with any individual doctor.
No. If a pharmacist works for Walgreen’s and Walgreen’s has a policy of selling Plan B, then the pharmacist has a choice of selling Plan B or finding another job.
But if that same pharmacist opens up his own corner store, he has every right to not sell Plan B.
Ummm, maybe you’re looking at a different chart, but your linked chart has a lot of firearm deaths between unintentional, homicide, and suicide. The only greater causes of death I see are drowning and car accidents.
Yes, they are anti-injury and anti-death. Why would anyone not be?
But that’s not all they are doing.
Yes, and the doctors follow the instructions of the organization. Every doctor isn’t coming up with their own list of questions to ask patients. They, as an organization, do that. The result is anti-gun doctors.
Unintentional firearm only makes the top ten for one age group and it’s not near the top. As to firearm related homicides, the docs would be better served asking about gang activity than guns in the home of they wanted to address that issue.
I actually agree it’s out of line to say, “you need to get rid of all the guns in your house.”
It’s not out of line to say, “You should keep your guns and ammunition locked away so that the child can’t access it.”
The law forbids any mention of guns. Which is overreaching.
That’s a legitimately interesting question. Do pharmacists in general have the right to pick and choose what medicines they sell?
48 1-4 yo’s were killed due to gang activity? It could be any kind of gun related homicide from intentional homicide (I’m gonna kill that bully), to accidental homicides (bullet through the wall), to murder suicide (dad kills mom and kids), to kid kills buddy while playing around with the gun. The report doesn’t spell that out. However, we DO know that a lot of kids die due to firearms.
I think there are fifty answers which range from “yes,” to “no.”
Sadly, he’s right. Even if I favored this TYPE of law, the clear overreach in this implementation makes it zany.
(I say sadly, because, you know, it makes me sad to have to agree with Lobohan.)
Lobohan + Bricker = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdximU6Ao00 <–video warning
You could just say that he agrees with you.
Where the hell did I say that? I have not claimed that pharmacists don’t have a right, on freedom-of-conscience grounds, to avoid doing part of their jobs because they have moral objections to it.
I disagree with them about the morality of exercising that right, but I do not claim that the right itself does not exist.
Idiot.
It’s really a shame because if you read the Pediatrician’s policy on pools it is a great guide of how they could write a sensible policy on guns:
You could do the same thing for guns…
Gun Rules
If you have a gun, insist that the following rules are followed:
Assume that all guns are always loaded.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
You could do the same thing for guns…
Trigger locks
Trigger locks prevent motion of the trigger. However, a trigger lock does not guarantee that the firearm cannot be discharged (see above). Some trigger locks are integrated into the design of the weapon, requiring no external parts besides the key. Generally, two pieces come together from either side behind the trigger and are locked in place, which can be unlocked with a key or combination. This physically prevents the trigger from being pulled to discharge the weapon. Other types of trigger locks do not go behind the trigger, but encompass the full area behind the trigger guard making the trigger inaccessible.
Chamber locks
Chamber locks aim to block ammunition from being chambered, since most firearms typically cannot be discharged unless the ammunition is in the correct position.
Cable locks
Cable locks are a popular type of chamber lock that usually threads through the breech and ejection port of repeating-action firearms; they generally prevent full cycling of the action, especially preventing a return to “battery”, with the breech fully closed. In many designs of pistol and rifle, they also prevent the proper insertion of a magazine.
Instead they literally say “Always keep the gun unloaded and locked up.”
It’s amazingly short sighted that the same organization that carefully lays out standards for pools and pool safety is so anti-gun that they can’t to the same thing for firearms. Instead of focusing on gun safety they focus mostly on the evils of guns and recommend not only not having them interrogating other parents to ensure that your kid never associates with those evil gun owners.
I notice that you dishonestly misrepresented their stance by failing to quote the remainder of the above advice to parents:
Yes, the AAP are saying that it is dangerous for young children to have access to guns, which is true, and that the best way to prevent young children from having access to guns is not to keep guns in homes where young children live, which is also true. They would be remiss in their duty as physicians if they didn’t make sure that the parents of young children know these things.
But they also acknowledge that some parents of young children are going to keep a gun in the home, and as long as such parents have been informed of the potential dangers and how to reduce them by safe gun storage, the AAP is not attempting to interfere with their doing so.
It’s a sad day for the forces of ignorance-fighting when people who knowingly follow courses of action that involve well-known and demonstrable risks are so hysterically oversensitive about it that they consider a child’s doctor responsibly informing the child’s parents of those risks to be some kind of ideological fanatic who needs to be muzzled by an intrusive law.
Sheesh. I participate plenty of non-zero-risk stuff myself, such as bicycle touring and rock climbing, and if I had a young child who accompanied me on such activities I would definitely expect to get an earful from his/her pediatrician about what the dangers were and what safety procedures would help minimize them. And yes, I know about all that shit already, but I would listen to the pediatrician’s spiel anyway because it is part of their doing their fucking job.
And they do ask about many other things, first and later. Read the goddamned pamphlet I linked to earlier. It instructs pediatricians to inform and ask parents about a huge variety of home safety issues, including:
- parental use of medications, alcohol and drugs
- tobacco smoke in the home
- lead levels in the home
- mold growth in the home
- sleep posture for infants
- parental hygiene
- baby and laundry hygiene
- car seat use
- parental seat belt use
- parental consumption of hot liquids near baby
- proper use of thermometers and first-aid materials
- domestic violence issues
- choking/strangling hazards from household objects
- burning/impact hazards from appliances and furniture
- chemical/shock hazards from substances such as cleaning products, and household electricity
- smoke detectors
Etcetera, etcetera. Anybody who tries to pretend that all pediatricians worry about is guns is an idiot as well as a liar.
Well, she should have known what to say next, because it’s very clearly indicated in the AAP guidelines. She should have made sure you were aware of the risks of letting young children have access to guns, and made sure you knew about the recommended ways of reducing those risks by either eliminating guns from the home or following safe-storage procedures, and then she should have moved on to the next subject.
The fact that you had one encounter with a clueless anti-gun pediatrician (which your hysterical paranoia on the subject has probably magnified in retrospect, if it ever actually happened in the first place) does not justify legally interfering with pediatricians in general doing their jobs.