Should Gun Violence Be Treated Like Car Accidents?

[SecularMotion]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by petronius (a host of the General Discussion forum).

The gun-control debate in the aftermath of a mass shooting is a stark reminder of the deeply held beliefs in the U.S. about firearms and access to them. Some members of the medical community, however, have been trying for years to broaden those conversations to include, not just arguments about the Constitution or political ideologies, but a discussion about the toll gun violence takes on public health. Their goal: to work to reduce incidents of gun violence in the same way as campaigns that targeted polio, smoking-related cancer or car accidents.

It's a controversial approach. Opponents, among them the gun lobby and many Republicans, believe the move is a thinly veiled effort to further restrict gun ownership and to provide new grounds for seizing firearms. But supporters, including doctors and medical associations, say that designating gun violence – which they define to include homicides, suicides and injuries – as a public health issue will save lives. Doctors already counsel patients about a range of safety issues, including avoiding lead paint, wearing seatbelts, getting vaccinated and dealing with the dangers of backyard pools. If the designation were to change, they could more often ask patients about whether they keep a gun in the home and, if so, how it is secured.

"We're not debating the constitutionality of firearms – that exists," says Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director for the American Public Health Association. "Firearms exist and people get hurt and die from firearms. There are ways for us in a nonpolitical manner to make people safer with their firearms in a society."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/07/07/the-rise-of-gun-violence-as-a-public-health-issue

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Treat them like a deadly disease.

A disease that kills, maims, leaves crippled for life.

[randys1]

28. yep

[PowerToThePeople]

2. Are car accidents treated like terrorists?

Because gun violence is terrorism.

[Maedhros]

40. We need to be very careful with how we use the term "terrorism."

Gun violence, per se, is not always terrorism. It can be murder, attempted murder, assault, destruction of property, menacing, coercion, etc.

Invoking "Terrorism" strips away a plethora of civil rights, which is bullshit enough, but to term everything we find abhorrent as "terrorism" makes the problem much, much worse.

[olddots]

3. guns are like tobacco

[flamin lib]

11. And should be treated the same. Warnings on packaging, ammunition and where sold.nt

[bigwillq]

26. And legal. And I hope it stays that way.

edited

[aikoaiko]

39. There are lots of warnings in the manuals.

And even on the guns themselves these days.

[Hoyt]

4. Remember when gun fanciers went nuts because Pediatricians were asking about presence of gunz

in home.

I hope for the day that gun lovers hide their gun love and slink around like those who still need to smoke.

[LAGC]

5. You'd just love it if gun owners were forced back into the closet like "teh gay", wouldn't you?

[Hoyt]

7. I think gun lovers should feel shame. As to rest of your post, you should be ashamed for

posting that. I really get tired of gun fanciers trying to equate their sick habit to real civil rights.

[LAGC]

8. The toothpaste is already out of the tube, my friend.

Just as gays aren't going back in the closet, neither are gun owners.

Guns are here to stay.

[Hoyt]

9. That's what Australians said until 1996. Now most are happy to not have yahoos running around

town with a gun in their pants.

[LAGC]

10. The Australians didn't have the Second Amendment in their Constitution either.

You'll never get 3/4 of the states to ratify it away.

[Hoyt]

12. Like SC said in Heller, it's OK to have a GUN AT HOME. You can do whatever you do with them there.

But the 2nd amendment, according to the Court, doesn't say anything about you walking around with a gun among the 96+% of the population who can walk outside without the darn things, and would never think of polluting society.

[LAGC]

14. Oh, I don't disagree.

Whether people should be able to tote in public should be a matter of open debate.

But you made it sound like gun owners should keep the curtains closed and never go out and target shoot, they should be so ashamed.

Admit it: you'd rather they all just be banned completely.

[Hoyt]

15. You should stay away from those who aren't attracted to lethal weapons.

I'm OK with folks who just have to have a gun or two at home, but not on the streets. More than one or two, should be tightly regulated, and gun hoarders subject to periodic mental health evaluations, among other restrictions including children being evaluated by DFACS.

[Adrahil]

21. What do you consider gun hoarding?

I have lots of guns. Most of them antiques, but some not. Somehow I've managed to never shoot anyone with one. And no, I don;t carry them around, except at the range.

Perhaps people who keep more than one or two bottles of booze at home should be evaluated too? Alcohol is responsible for more deaths than guns.

[1939]

16. "keep and bear"?????? NT

[Hoyt]

17. You need to read Heller, especially ole right wing racist Tony's opinion.

[former9thward]

23. Actually it does say that.

Saying that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized a right to bear arms for self-defense, which can be just as necessary outside the home as in one’s home, a divided three-judge panel of a federal appeals court in Chicago has struck down as unconstitutional an Illinois law that prohibits most citizens from carrying a concealed handgun in public.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/7th_circuit_strikes_illinois_concealed-carry_ban_gives_state_180_days_to_re/

[SheilaT]

35. I get it. You can do whatever you want with your guns at home

which includes leaving them out where little children get ahold of them. No problem there.

[flamin lib]

13. Yeah, just need to enforce the first half of it. nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

43. Per USC Title X the unorganized militia is.comprised of

All able bodied men 18 to 45 and all able bodied women who successfully completed basic military training. If the first half of the 2A were enforced as you suggest then anyone in those categories would be obligated to keep and maintain a military grade rifle or similar arms.

Is that what you meant?

[TeamPooka]

19. The Consitution was created full of mistakes that can be corrected. nt

[randys1]

29. +1000000000000000000000

[Human101948]

6. They also dismiss the study showing diminishing numbers of households with guns because...

they claim that gun nuts are too paranoid to respond to surveys about gun ownership.

Only 32% of Americans said they either own a gun or live with a person who does, tying with the record low set in 2010, according to the latest General Social Survey (GSS). During the late 1970s and early 1980s, about half of Americans said they lived in a household with a firearm.

Twenty-two percent of Americans said they own a firearm, down from a high of 31% who answered similarly in 1985.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/us-gun-ownership-declining

[former9thward]

22. The FBI states gun background checks are going up every year.

There were 21,000,000 last year. That is up from 10,000,000 in 2006. But I guess with your theory its just a couple people out there buying all those guns.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/nics_firearm_checks_-_month_year.pdf

[yeoman6987]

18. There is no constitutional right to smoke

We have a constitutional right to have guns. That the difference.

[aikoaiko]

37. False! Some 'went nuts' when a doctor denied future medical services to a family for not wanting...

...to answer a question about owning guns or not.

And rightly so. I know you'd like to diminish what the doctor did, but it was reprehensible.

[gratuitous]

20. I would agree

Or, at the very least, treat gun ownership like car ownership or home ownership. If something bad happens with your car, you have insurance to help pay for the damages. If you're paying on a mortgage, the mortgagor requires you to carry homeowner's insurance, and it's a good idea anyway. Someone gets hurt in your house or on the surrounding property, homeowner's insurance is there to help pay for the damages.

Gun owners should likewise be required to carry insurance - if any insurance company would cover such a lunatic possession - to guarantee coverage for the injury or death it inflicts. Considering the known risks of owning a gun, I think minimum coverage should be $1 million. Some insurance actuary could calculate the monthly premium, but based on an average of $83-117 per month for a car, I wonder if some prospective gun owners might reconsider the wisdom of owning a small personal arsenal, but isn't the public entitled to be protected from gun owner negligence in the same way we're protected from car owner negligence?

[NobodyHere]

24. So in other words

You want to price people out of their constitutional rights.

[gratuitous]

33. Just putting some of that "well-regulated" original intent into the amendment

You're presumably happy with the status quo of people being maimed and killed every day without recourse? Put me down in the "not happy" column.

[aikoaiko]

44. Technically, regardless of the meaning, the phrase well-regulated modifies the militia, not the

people who keep and bear arms.

[seveneyes]

25. Nature does not include "Safe" in its existence

Even quanta are not safe when in numbers.

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. Gun owners should be required to buy insurance

In the event thst their property is used to cause harm to oth others, or in case of accident.

[hack89]

32. No insurance company will cover crimes or negligence

In any case your idea will make the NRA a fortune.

[Agnosticsherbet]

34. I have to buy car insurance and house insurance.

If there is money to be made, someone will cover it.

I don't give a rat' s as about the NRA.

[REP]

36. It's called an umbrella policy

[hack89]

42. And neither will pay out for criminal acts

Or criminal negligence.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

31. PSA's to discourage rampaging murder sprees?

[aikoaiko]

38. You only like when it helps your cause and reject it when it hurts the anti-gun cause.

[aikoaiko]

41. ""We're not debating the constitutionality of firearms – that exists," says Dr. Georges Benjamin"

Yes, because the antigun contingent lost this argument utterly.

Keeping and bearing arms as an individual right is affirmed.

[petronius]

45. Locking. The 'Statement of Purpose' for the General Discussion forum restricts gun

threads, and Host consensus is that this topic does not meet the exceptions to the SoP. See this thread for details.

Please feel free to repost and continue the discussion in one of the two DU Groups specified for firearms-related topics:

Gun Control & RKBA

Gun Control Reform Activism

Thank you!