Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Another one bites the dust.

A Miami federal judge has struck down the new law prohibiting Florida doctors from discussing gun ownership with their patients. The ruling extends the legal losing streak of Gov. Rick Scott and right-wing lawmakers, who have set a pathetic record for unconstitutional bills.

Written by the National Rifle Association, the so-called Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act would have prevented concerned physicians from asking patients about guns kept in their houses. It’s a reasonable query in domestic situations in which children might be at risk.

But the GOP-controlled legislature wants doctors to shut up about guns and stick to lecturing women about their abortion decisions. So much for privacy.

By necessity, doctors ask lots of personal questions. Are you using any illegal drugs? How much alcohol do you drink in a week? Do you smoke cigarettes? Do you suffer from depression?

We’ve all filled out the checklists while sitting in the waiting room. And, on the examination table, we’ve all heard doctors and nurses ask things we wouldn’t post on Facebook.

Say, have you noticed if your urine is changing color?

Uh, no.

Most of us have never been asked by our health-care providers whether we have a gun, or where on the premises we keep it. However, most of us don’t have bullet scars, needle tracks or booze on our breath when showing up for a medical appointment.

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 56

77 responses to “Florida Loses Another Ridiculous Legal Battle”

  1. ctruskey says:

    I find it amusing that Mr. Hiaasen supports a federal judge overturning a piece of legislation approved by the State’s legislative body and signed into law by the Governor when so many talking heads for the Dems including the President argued that the unelected Supreme Court shouldn’t overturn the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) because it was a law approved by the elected federal legislative body. President Obama’s Department of Justice has no problem going after laws passed by States but is up in arms when States challenge a law passed by Congress. You gotta love this country:-)

    • MikeCassidyAHS says:

      Mike Cassidy
      Utica, Md.

    • Edsanjuan says:

      ctruskey: Your comments are so correct and so perceptive. There is an answer though: The Democraps are such HYPOCRITES (you see, they HAVE to be !! When you have double and triple standards, and when right or wrong depends on WHO poses the question, you have to be a hypocrite !!)

      • highpckts says:

        It takes a hypocrite to know one!! I can’t think of bigger hyprocrites than all of congress

      • Landsende says:

        You mean like Etch A Sketch Romney the flip flopper?

        • Edsanjuan says:

          NO, landsende ! I meant like Eric Holder the gangster (with no “gang”, other than his boss who, for some “strange” reason, does not want him to come clean !!)

          • Lynda says:

            Gangster? Really? Would you like to flesh out such a statement and offer something of value to back up your claim? I’ve spoken with several of my GOP friends and they’ve used the same adjective without the ability to define what they mean.

          • Edsanjuan says:

            Lynda: As a courtesy to you, let me illustrate. Definition of “gangster”: gangster – a criminal who is a member of a gang.
            The criminal is Eric Holder who has been charged of a criminal offense for not supplying Congress with the complete dossier (that means “files”, Lynda) on the Fast and Furious (failed) operation. The “gang” is the White House and (all !!) staff, headed by the WORST EVER President (including Jimmy Carter, and THAT is saying a lot !!). This “President” has disgraced the Presidency and EMBARRASSED our Nation.
            But, you’ll see, come November all of you unconditional Obummer fans will get your fannies whacked ….

          • Justin Napolitano says:

            Edsanjuan, Holder has not been charged with a crime. Congress held him in contempt but since he works for the president and the President has said that certain documents are off limits the case is closed. The justice department will not charge him with a crime so it is over.
            So sorry to destroy your delusions.
            One other thing. As unlikely as it is that Obama will lose the Presidency, should it happen you will still be a loser when you find that you have been made a fool by the Republicans.
            Just remembered that the Republicans don’t care one bit about you unless you have millions of dollars.

          • Eduardo says:

            Oh, Justin! You are such a fool !!
            It is INCREDIBLE that you actually are proud that (your words, not mine !): “… but since he works for the president and the President has said that certain documents are off limits the case is closed. The justice department will not charge him with a crime so it is over.” WOW JUSTIN NAPOLITANO, you are actually PROUD of THAT ??!!
            You are JUST like your Aunt Janet: a shallow, idiotic, UNCONDITIONAL minion of Barry Soetoro Owebama !!
            PATHETIC, Justin !!

          • ObozoMustGo says:

            Ed… they’re all Chicago thug low lifes. Not a bit of difference between the scumbag in the WH now and thugs killing kids on the streets of Chicago.

            Keep up the good fight.

            Have a nice day!

          • Justin Napolitano says:

            You are really an expert on scumbags because you have been one all of your life. And I will fight you whenever I find your ridiculous assertions, Obozo.

          • ObozoMustGo says:

            go back to your coloring book, boy! And don’t break all your Crayons…

            Have a nice day!

          • metrognome3830 says:

            OMG, you encourage Edsanjuan and his ilk. Why? Surely you know they are the nutjobs you so often speak of. Ol’ Ed and his kind are the main reason I am giving up on posting. What’s the old saying? “Insanity is doin the same thing . . . etc., etc. You know the one. I haven’t seen you around for awhile.

            Have a nice day!

          • ObozoMustGo says:

            Hi Metro! I’ve been on vacation and still am. Just took a little time to check in. Nice to hear from you. I hope you and Mrs. Metro are doing well. I am enjoying not being so “plugged in”. As far as encouraging Ed… why not? 🙂 And yes, agreed on the insanity definition. I think I’ve posted just about everything I can say. I’ll keep coming back to stir the pot, however. It’s fun. 🙂 I miss our conversations, though, Metro.

            Back to R & R….. 🙂

            Have a great day! Send my regards to your lovely bride, please.

      • patuxant says:

        Ed. Think your talking about the GOPhers and there flipper, Mitt!

    • Some laws are stupid; others actually benefit their benefactors. I’d much rather my grandmother could have had health insurance 10 years ago when she died of Cancer; she might have survived if she could have afforded the treatments.

      • jerrimyers says:

        Keep your message going. So many citizens don’t know what good benefits they now will have in the new health care law. The Republicans keep saying how much it is costing in taxes; they fail to deduct from that bill the costs that are being eliminated directly from the pockets of the people in lowering the cost of the premiums; no longer cost for mamograms, colonoscopies, and well check doctors’ visits, etc. More of the premiums paid to insurance companies must be invested in actually paying benefits instead of “administration” costs, i.e., exhorbitant CEO salaries. And most important, as in your grandmother’s situation, more people can afford to buy insurance and small companies can afford to offer insurance to their employees. What’s not to like about OBAMACARE?

        • ObozoMustGo says:

          jerri… you morons on the left actually believe this crap about lowering costs. How stupid can you be? Well….. don’t answer that. We already know the unfortunate answer to that question.

          I constantly see this comment from useful idiots on the left:

          >”The Republicans keep saying how much it is costing in taxes; they fail to deduct from that bill the costs that are being eliminated directly from the pockets of the people in lowering the cost of the premiums; no longer cost for mamograms, colonoscopies, and well check doctors’ visits, etc.”<

          Do the doctors work for free? Are the people that make mamogram machines giving them away? Do they work for free?

          Your leftist nutjob mentality is EXACTLY what's wrong with America. Too many of you morons actually believe that you are entitled to the labor of a doctor to be paid for by the labor of your neighbor. You lazy idiots ought to all be thrown out of America or be forced to pay your own damned way in this world.

          Have a nice day!

    • howa4x says:

      give it up! We have more guns in this country than any other country in the world. The population is armed to the teeth as they say. Both of these decisions involved child protection. One to protect children against negligent parents and home gun violence, and the other is to protect children from profit driven insurance companies who before the act denied children with pre-existing medical conditions coverage.
      It seems you really don’t care or understand how to protect children do you

    • Justin Napolitano says:

      It violated the doctor’s right to free speech. Do you understand that? And the final word on these things is the court system not some GD republican NRA sucking legislature.
      I can ask you or any other person in the US any question I wish because I have the right to free speech.
      Tell me CT do you still beat your wife?

  2. Edsanjuan says:

    WHAT what ? !!!

  3. tokoloshi27 says:

    Hiaasen’s bias aside; the contrast is interesting – having pediatric doctors write 2nd amendment legislation.

    Firearm safety should continue to be a rigorous test of any 2nd amendment legislation. The problem is that too many intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals have never trained with small arms and therefore have only media-induced sensationalist perspectives about the issue. This is not conducive to adult debate; witness Hiaasen’s instant, knee-jerk dismissal of anything from the NRA.

    Let’s be honest, for once; the NRA has a significant membership drawn from middle America. While much of their funds are directed legislatively, a significant portion are spent at the grassroots on basic firearms training with an emphasis on safety. This is a good thing in my opinion, firearms are not complicated, but they do require vigilance and safety skills.

    Even critics of the 2nd amendment should have some basic knowledge of firearms, because when they realize that firearms are just tools that need to be treated differently from a bulldozer, then perhaps they won’t themselves be tools for totalitarian types, which after all is what the 2nd Amendment was written about.

    • saguine says:

      I am sure the drafters of the second amendment did not consider, criminals, lunatics and children to be part of a well regulated militia. The NRA represents and is funded in part by gun manufacturers whose objective is to sell as many guns as possible, irrespective of whwther this is in the national interest. As quickly as the police removes guns from circulation it is replaced. There is a link between cheap guns and street crime. I am all for an armed militia but it must be regulated.

    • Personally I’m not critiquing the 2nd amendment, I’m critiquing a law that potentially puts people at risk–from such other people as those with severe depression (a lot of gun deaths are suicides) or other medical conditions that warp the mind of even experienced and conscientious gun owners. Much better that the doctor tries to find these things out even if it’s only to protect his patient from himself.

      Does the NRA WANT mentally-challenged people running around with guns? “Guns don’t kill people, people do.” If the gun owner is no longer mentally sound, isn’t it only right that some effort be made to either alert their families to the problem or find a way to make it more difficult for that person to access their weapons while they are ill?

      No, this wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction to the NRA; it was a valid response for the protection of life. Remember, the Hippocratic Oath prevents the doctor from revealing any private information gained without good cause.

    • SaneJane says:

      I clicked “Like” by mistake and do not agree with you. I was taught proper and safe firearm use at a young age and have always had at least one gun and sometimes several. However, I do not think the gun culture we have currently is healthy. I live in the south and most here are of the “cold dead hand” variety. I think people should have a legal right to own guns but they should also be obligated to demonstrate their firearm worthiness. I trust me but I don’t know you. We certainly need better controls than are present in many states such as Arizona. There is no excuse for children being injured and killed by guns. The term “accidental shooting” is a misnomer, it should be “irresponsible shooting”. Many people have loaded guns throughout the home, in their vehicle and on their person. If guns are available to curious children that is a recipe for disaster.

      • tokoloshi27 says:

        I couldn’t agree more with your sentiments on keeping children safe. The problem, from my POV is that when you start having medical decisions predicated on a checklist analysis questions about a third party; this concerns me. If all they were going to do was make sure that the person had satisfactorily accomplished a firearms safety course, that would be one thing. However if the information was used in some other way, this is concerning.

        Since the issue revolves around a 2nd amendment question there is an apparent media requirement to refrain from a full and complete discussion of the background and other relevant facts. I’ll give you an example from the article, “according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, one out of every 25 children delivered to pediatric trauma centers has a gunshot wound.” Now we probably have a reasonable appreciation of what constitutes a trauma center, by my rough count there are about 51 accredited pediatric trauma centers in the United States. Since many states don’t have them, and the states that do (CA, TX, MA, WI and OH) seem to have several, this suggests the statistic was slanted for article impact. 4% of children admitted to these facilities had gunshot wounds, a reasonable supposition is they were severe, since if they were minor then they wouldn’t have been transported appreciable distances. With no mention of national gross numbers (why omit fatalities for example) or how inflicted (firearm mishap is after all the theme of the piece) using this statistic only serves to incite fear and not rational discussion.

        You are right to point out that, “Many people have loaded guns throughout the home, in their vehicle and on their person. If guns are available to curious children that is a recipe for disaster.” However I would submit that an unloaded firearm is a paperweight with respect to protection, simple ownership is not the answer. For protection, controlling the weapon, and securing it in a manner consistent with it’s intended application (i.e.; vermin vs predator control) involves making all the residents (especially including curious children) aware and familiar with storage and safe use principles.

        • AdamMos says:

          I still do not understand the benefit of most of the current NRA legislation. What is the benefit of going to a gun show in AZ and purchasing 200 semi automatic weapons (no background check or wait) and proceeding into the parking lot and selling those weapons to the first Mexican drug cartel member with cash? This is legal? I missed the benefit here.

          • tokoloshi27 says:

            Adam, I’ll assume that was a serious question. The basic difference is that if I own a firearm, and I’m not a ‘dealer’ then I don’t have to go through the same paper-work requirements when I sell my property to another person.

            Gun shows (flee-markets etc) do pose a problem, since folks with a booth don’t generally have to comply, unless they are actually licensed dealers. The ‘gun-control’ spin on this topic obscures that the same sort of process is also at work, for example, with personal automobile sales.

            The problem is only, in my opinion, exacerbated by being regulated by ATF at the Federal level. ATF has a culture that is not conducive to sapient concepts, whipsawed as it is by the competing, contradictory missions that it has.

    • Justin Napolitano says:

      Wow, that is amazing. Of course we all have the right to defend ourselves but just try to imagine everyone walking around with a loaded concealed weapon. Even the slightest disagreement could result in people shooting at each other. But that doesn’t bother me as much as bullets flying around killing innocent bystanders. I have no problem with the right to bear arms unless that right supersedes my right to life or the life of my wife, children or grandchildren by gun toting paranoid fanatics. Or by irresponsible and unconcerned gun owners. Ask yourself how comfortable you would be in a room filled with gun toting people having an argument or even a slight disagreement?

      The right to bear arms group assumes that people are responsible with guns, know how to use them and safeguards there storage but at the same time also assumes that they are right there ready to be used when needed. If someone walked up to Ted Nugent with a gun ready to kill him he would not be able to react in time to prevent his own death anymore than those who protected President Reagan, Kennedy or Robert Kennedy. Someone that wants to kill you, with a gun, will do so and there is very little you can do about it except, perhaps, lock yourself in a secure house with guns in both hands ready to fire.

      Here is some statistics you may find interesting.

      Gun Violence in America
      Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire: 16,907 in firearm suicides, 11,920 in firearm homicides, 730 in unintentional shootings, and 232 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries.

      (This statistic says that over seventeen hundred fire arm deaths or injuries are reported each week in the US.)

      So when someone tells me how guns make people secure tell it to the one million Americans who died by gunfire since I graduated from high school in 1960.

      Below is a link that illustrates the deadliness of guns.

  4. Why would anyone want a law that is not necessary. A doctor should be able to ask any question he cares to ask of his patient. The patient is free to not answer the questions, or lie. He is not under oath. I thought conservatives wanted less regulation. Lets not enact unecessary Laws.

    • AIMPOINT says:

      The issue arises when a pediatrician inquires of a minor as to his parents private practices, not just guns. Do they own guns, smoke pot, consume alcoholic beverages or have wild parties? Things that on their surfaces have little diagnostic significance but can result in a Child Services bureaucrat investigating the parents.

      The doctor becomes an inquisitor and then if there is a refusal to address an issue she/he can refuse to treat the patient. That is how this law arose: “You won’t tell us if your folks own a gun – we won’t treat you.”

      What one tells a doctor becomes a permanent part of his medical records and can follow him for years with negative results in terms of employment and insurablity.

      Having raised a bunch of kids, insurabilty and employability being important considerations, I would have the kid answer such questions with :”I don’t know,” rather than have some doctor’s political agenda mark the child with his perceived negatives noted on their medical records for perhaps a lifetime. Medical records are now being computerized so access to this information will be instant and insecure.

      Therefore, be circumspect as to what you and yours disclose to physicians which are remote from any medical problem because it can come back to haunt you/them when they apply for a job, life or health insurance.

      • ObozoMustGo says:

        Aim… you really need to stop that sort of rational common sense thinking around here. Don’t you understand that the disastrous consequences of leftist nutjob ideas are NOT important? Don’t you realize that it’s the INTENT of the leftist nutjobs that counts? Not reality!! Individual freedom and liberty is the LAST thing these leftist nutjobs think about or even give a damn about.

        Have a nice day!

        • Justin Napolitano says:

          Obozo, it is nice to know your are still a moron. What about the rights of the doctor to free speech? Fux off stupid bastar*.

        • Eduardo says:

          Yep ! ObozoMustGo and AIMPOINT: This guy’s surname (Napolitano) should have given you an idea of the kind of JERK that he is !!! These people are really PATHETIC !!
          Come November they will all get their sweet fannies whipped !! ha, ha !!!

        • metrognome3830 says:

          Rational, common sense thinking? Oh, come on, man! Aimpoint is neither rational nor in posession of common sense. He is paranoid, that’s what he is. And you know it. Quit encouraging the poor fellow. “Help, the paranoids are after me!”

          • ObozoMustGo says:

            Metro… rational thinking…. it’s a conservative thing. I dont expect the leftist nutjobs to understand. 🙂

            Have a nice day!

      • Justin Napolitano says:

        Aimpoint, that is total bullshit! A doctor can ask you any GD thing his wants and if you don’t like his questions go to another doctor. As far as asking a child about the bruises on his back or the, obvious marks on his arms or legs that look like mistreatment it is the law that he do so.
        Please take your GD gun and shove it up your posterior. A judge has stated that the law is unconstitutional so shut the fux up, dumb-ass.

        • AIMPOINT says:

          You sound like you don’t or never had any kids who were put in juxtaposition to an authority figure. In fact, your adolescence is manifest in your writing.

  5. howa4x says:

    This is an important question in a right to carry state where gun ownership is higher, and the population not as smart as other areas. It is part of the health of the family kind of question trying to protect the child from the negligence of the parent. The tea party seems to care more about gun ownership than child safety. They proved that when a House committee refused to ban the direct advertising of sugery products directly to children. The tea party and their evengelical base say they care about family values, but constantly advocate anti child policies.
    We are in the midst of an obesity epidemic with childhood diabetes rates are at 14%. this is an adult disease, so banning advdertising of sugery foods directly to them is called childhood protection, but the tea party sided with the sugar industry. In the gun ownership/doctor battle the tea party sided with the gun makers over child protections again( anyone see a pattern?) and in the on going assault on enviornmental protection the tea party for example sides with the coal industry attempt to not put scrubbers on their stacks to take out chemical byproducts like mercury from the air. So they would rather have children exposed to these dangerous chemicals than have the industry protect the population even though childhood asthma rates are growing every year.
    I have no idea anymore what the evengelicals believe in, but they are practicing their interpertation of religion in an anti child, and anti human way.

    • SaneJane says:

      Maybe that is why they are against birth control and advocate large families. That way if they lose a few children they will still have plenty left to clean up schools and take care of mom and dad when the Republicans have eliminated all our social programs.

      • howa4x says:

        Well they do want to turn the clock back so maybe they want to go to the turn of the century, the 19th that is when large families were needed because so many died. Mostly from childhood diseases that are preventable if people have access to health care. But wait! The tea party is agianst healthcare access too!!

      • Gary says:

        In Sane Jane if most of the population is sucking up free money-welfare-and all the freebies without adding to the to the pot the pot goes dry Dummy!

    • “Suffer the children to come unto me.” It seems some want the children to go to him sooner rather than later.

    • AIMPOINT says:

      See my comment below – There are non-Evangelical, non-gun related reasons for the this type of law. The defect in this law is that it prohibited inquiry, limited it to guns rather then preventing a doctor from refusing to treat a patient who declines to answer personal questions about himself or other members of the household, e.g., Sexual practices, illegal drug use, gun ownership or even if the patient rides a motorcycle.

      • howa4x says:

        Doctors ususally ask about sexual practices to detrrmine is you are at risk and also ask about illigal drug use is you show track marks or your blood test comes back positive for them. Doctors don’tcare about waht you drive but do care if there are guns in the house when they seem more and more kids comming in with gun shot wounds. It’s called child protectioin

      • CraigsList says:

        so we should also prevent the government from asking personal questions like that prior to giving a crackhead welfare mom her drug money?

        • AIMPOINT says:

          Not germane; this is about pediatricians asking children personal questions about their parents on pain of non-treatment. Home schooling didn’t work out for you, did it, knuckle dragger?

  6. miserableoldfart says:

    This “law,” of course was patently ridiculous. Much more serious, however, is the Pennsylvania gag order on doctors discussing the health effects of fracking with their patients. This law is equally ridiculous, but could increase mortality and morbidity in places where people would attempt escape if the very clear dangers that fracking presents were explained to them by medical professionals.

    The Pennsylvania gag rule should result not in just being struck down, but the imprisonment and / or execution of those who made it.

    • ObozoMustGo says:

      Only a useful idiot like you actually believes that fracking is dangerous. You don’t even know what you’re talking about. I suppose you don’t like things like lights… air conditioning… refridgerators…. you know… simple stuff like electricity. However, the rest of us actually like those things. So keep your miserable old mouth shut!

      Have a nice day!

      • Justin Napolitano says:

        Obozo go frack yourself. There is a glut of natural gas in this country right now and many if not most of the fracked wells are being capped.
        Sure we need energy but we don’t need to screw the environment, for all eternity, to get it. I assume you don’t live in an area where fracking is occurring else you would be sensitive about the effects of fracking and the huge amounts of water and toxic chemicals being injected into the ground.
        I predict that the effects of fracking will come back to haunt this country for years.
        By the way a Canadian pipeline sprung a leak recently and 800,000 gallon of thick Canadian oil spilled. It took 17 hours for the company to even realize that they had a leak.
        So much for environmental responsibility.

        • ObozoMustGo says:

          Actually, I am VERY familiar with fracking and natural gas. There is NO environmental impact. Regarding water use, fracking does use a lot of water, but that issue is already being resolved by free enterprise and smart entrepreneurs who are way ahead of you leftist nutjobs and enviro wackos, as they ALWAYS are. Unless you want to turn off your lights or AC, STFU!

          So what a little oil spilled on the ground. Big deal. FYI…. the oil actually DID come from the ground. Yes, it did! Oil is as natural as water is. And when it spills, you wipe it up and move on. You’re too young to remember the Exxon Valdez spill and all the enviro wackos screaming and yelling about the permanent damage to the environment. 3 years later, no one could tell that it ever happened. No big deal. However, the real reason they scream is because they successfully extorted BILLIONS of dollars from Exxon for their own selfish purposes. The same thing happened with the BP spill. The same will happen with this little Canadian spill. The only real shame to any oil spill is the lost oil. The environment will take care of itself.

          Have a nice day!

  7. Ed says:

    They tend to be selective about that “less regulation” thing!

  8. dljones says:

    Carl: you hit the nail square. The only time I require a gun is to assure my safety into the door of the doctors office. After that he can take care of my gout.

  9. William Deutschlander says:

    Rick Scott is a racketeer, proven in court, nothing of value will ever originate in his presence.

  10. Bigspender says:

    I don’t live in Florida. But if I did, I’d be seriously embarrassed by the idiots in charge in that state. How does an inept buffoon like Rick Scott become governor anyhow?

    • ExPAVIC says:


      Florida is a political petri dish run by the American Taliban Republican Plutocrats. This is what actually could happen if these Taliban anti-everythings got hold of national politics.

      If that isn’t scary enough, they have a 57% to 43% advantage in SW Florida. There primary elections are THE elections since no Democrats are dumb enough to run in general elections with those figures.

      Plus our brain storming, make that blizzard brained, governor thinks he is playing a board game where the winner comes up with the craziest scheme. Oh, yes he is a Naples resident, the SW Florida Taliban home base.

      You may remember Rick Scott as the guy who scammed $1.8 billion, not $1 billion as he claims, out of Medicare and should have been jailed for the attempt. He must have friends in high places for all we could figure here, or else he disclosed how he did the deed so that it couldn’t be repeated.

    • Justin Napolitano says:

      He bought the job with the money his company, and himself, earned for the biggest Medicare fraud in US history. Some people believe he should be in Leavenworth, not the Florida Governors mansion.

  11. HGLtraveling says:

    Now-a-days doctors exercise all too much power. They join large “medical Practices” and refuse to treat patients on a whim, discharging them –not only from their individual practice– but from being seen by other physicians in their medical corporation which they consider “their practice”. This means that a physician can blacklist a patient from being seen or treated by all physicians “in their practice” and in their county, not just because they have a fire-arm in their home or their pee is changing color, but for any reason they chose, be it rational or simply a personal prejudice. I personally do not subscribe to the quick-fix method of medical care, wherein physicians instantly hand the patient a RX for any variety of pharmaceuticals in lieu of actually taking the necessary time to talk to the patient. [Docs are in a big hurry to cash in on insurance payments, and rarely spend more that 15 minutes with a patient these days.] Asa a consequence of my belief in a more natural approach and use of alternative medicine whenever possible, I was “discharged” from a physician’s practice several years ago only to belatedly learn this year, [when I needed surgery] that this doctor’s practice consisted of a huge medical corporation that enlisted nearly every physician and surgeon in my county. The result: I had to travel over 200 miles to have the surgery.
    The days of a kindly, well meaning physician, caring for you and your family without being wholly self-serving, are OVER!
    While not a republican, I am beside myself with terror at OBAMA CARE which requires all Americans to pay for health care, while failing to require all insurance providers to cover all forms of health care, including natural medicine, acupuncture, chiropractic care, homeopathy, massage therapy, psychotherapies, etc. Instead, the practice of medicine has become and will remain, big business, and frankly, I’m not thrilled with the current standard of medical care these days, nor with physicians who’s laziness forces patronization of the pharmaceutical industry at my expense.
    I’m also not thrilled with physicians –who obviously care less about me than covering their own asses– asking me questions about anything that doesn’t directly pertains to my health and current condition. It is the purview of social workers, police or teachers who may inadvertently learn of guns in a household, to report or investigate these issues which could put a child at risk, not our physicians.
    It’s unlikely in my lifetime, I will see the day when doctors actually care about us.

  12. ObozoMustGo says:

    The Obozo Presidential Library has already been built!!!………. And it’s full of everything he knows already.

    [click photo to enlarge]

    Have a nice day!

    • ExPAVIC says:


      Is that where you store your brain when you aren’t using it which is most of the time? You Taliban moron.

    • Justin Napolitano says:

      I seriously doubt you have ever been in a library, Obozo.
      One must be able to read and comprehend to get any benefit from a …

  13. The NRA is a collection of seriously challenged nut cases. Every effort by sane individuals to protect the lives of citizens is treated as if the 2nd amendment is being repealed. Nor will the NRA be a party to creating a framework that will protect citizens and the 2nd amendment. Instead they come snarling out from under their rocks and attack physicians that are trying to protect the lives of patients and families. Like priest and preachers and psychiatrist, doctors are enjoined from going to the cops. They can be held legally liable if they divulge patient information even if the patient is a danger to society. The NRA isn’t responsible for their own actions.

  14. 113121 says:

    The NRA is a group of people who wish to sell any weapon to anyone anywhere. They have nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment or normal gun ownership. It’s time we all got that idea through to the rest of normal everyday citizens.

  15. rustacus21 says:

    4get Kansas!!! What the holy HECK is wrong w/Florida?! Scott, West, Zimmerman!!! This mass mental disturbance has got to be curable!!! How can people misunderstand their role in a Democratic, civil, CIVILIZED society?!!?

  16. Eduardo says:

    Hey ObozoMustGo (to hell): Could not agree more with you !!
    And since 1 or 2 months ago, they are running soooooo SCARED !!!
    Poor SLOBS ….

  17. Eduardo says:

    Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, little Justin !! Come on now. You should not call ANYBODY a moron with that surname of yours ….
    You, my friend, are PATHETIC !!

  18. daffodilly says:

    We have all sorts of rights, including the right to not go to Florida on vacation.

  19. As a resisdent of Florida, I am most angry about the legal defense of the indefenseable. Court challanges cost money and the looser pays for both sides (usually). How did any of this advance those issues that are important to the state: Jobs, Home Prices, Jobs, Tourist industry, Jobs?

    It will not be enough to re elect the President – we must give him a Congress that will focus on issues important to us and work together for solutions.

    • John1943 says:

      I know this is an old thread, but I can’t let this go unanswered. Joan, you are worried about the costs of this court case? And yet you want to reelect a president that has cost the country perhaps a billion times that much, with nothing to show for it?

      Oh, not quite nothing. His cronies could show you luxury yachts, jets etc. etc. paid from money intended to bail out companies they have since allowed to fail. Oh yes, Michelle can show you all her holiday snaps and souvenirs from all over the world, taken and bought at our expense. And Obama himself must have improved his golf enormously, the amount of time he spends playing it.

  20. dhill201250 says:

    Maybe doctors should ask what party they plan to vote for. It has a direct impact on not only your health but of everyone’s health. If you plan on voting democrate it could severly damage your life expectancy and health as well as that of your family and others. I am glad doctors now can ask these important quality of life issues.

  21. M L says:

    all politicians need polygraphs about their intentions for our tax moneys and lives. we need answers like a beauty pagent winner. make life great, end horriblenesses and 99% fat people who dont have healthy goals. not make a nickle for his friends and himself. make their life depend on it. screw up and every american gets to give him a swat with a paddle hourly for his prison sentence.

  22. John1943 says:

    It is none of my doctor’s goldarned business whether I own a firearm at all, unless perhaps I have clinical depression or terminal illness and even then I’d argue my right to make my own decisions.

    It is none of my doctor’s business either whether I have long cords on electrical appliances, smoke detectors, gates on my stairs or whatever. The most they should do is hand out pamphlets to all patients warning of common household risks. If we choose to ignore them, that’s fine, but anti-gun doctors should not be in a position where they can refuse treatment to gun owners, as has been the case all too often. Doctors, by the nature of things, see the damage that firearms do. They rarely see damage that’s prevented. Why don’t they ask me if I own a car? After all, cars are responsible for far more deaths and injuries than are firearms.

    Doctor, you stick to warning me of the risks of eating too much sugar, or not taking my medication. You are neither trained nor qualified to assess the risks of my gun ownership, especially as so many doctors sadly believe that the likes of the media, the Brady campaign and the so-called Violence Prevention center are spreading accurate information.

    Should my doctor ask me, the answer will be “No.” I don’t like lying to them, but, as I said earlier, it’s none of their goldarned business.

  23. rockyventi says:

    Wait until you non-gunners are staring down the barrel of a 45 automatic; you will wish you had a chance to carry your own defensive weapon. I have a sign in my yard. It read: “Go next door, my neighbor does not believe in firearms”…

  24. Ain’t NO-bodys bid’ness but my own”! Drs. should not discuss or ask anything if not requested by a “unit”. Oh! FYI; that’s what we Seniors are called by Obama’s Death Panels. Dr’s must get permission from the panel before they can operate on anyone over 70 or is on medicaid. Everyone “poo Pooed” Sarah Palin when she predicted it. Look out! all you senile old FOOLs who voted for Obama. Your Dead Meat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Am over 70. I did NOT vote for him and would NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and- I was a LIFE long DEM. LOOK IT UP if you don’t believe it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.