Florida Law will Prohibit Pediatricians from Asking Parents if Guns are Safely Stored

[The Straight Story]

Florida Law will Prohibit Pediatricians from Asking Parents if Guns are Safely Stored

Republicans in Florida are preparing to adopt a new law forbidding doctors from asking patients if they own guns.

Representing the first of its kind, the legislation is directed primarily at pediatricians, who routinely ask new parents if they have guns at home and if they’re stored safely.

Pediatricians say they ask about guns in homes in order to prevent accidental injuries. But the National Rifle Association (NRA) thinks doctors have a political agenda.

“This bill is about helping families who are complaining about being questioned about gun ownership, and the growing anti-gun political agenda being carried out in examination rooms by doctors and staffs,” NRA lobbyist Marion Hammer told NPR.

http://www.allgov.com/Controversies/ViewNews/Florida_Law_will_Prohibit_Pediatricians_from_Asking_Parents_if_Guns_are_Safely_Stored_110510

[plumbob]

1. If the NRA gets any more moronic, they won't actually be able to remember

where they stored their weapons.

Apologies to actual morons.

[DrDan]

2. gotta protect those arsenals - the safety of the children is secondary to the guns

[lawodevolution]

65. Right trump any fake perception of safety

Pediatritions don't even advise patients on gun safety because patients lie and say no when asked about guns.

Now they will have to be more responsible and assume everyone owns guns and talk about gun safes etc with all parents

[Turbineguy]

3. Good.

More dead children is a republican priority. They can't produce anything because of these stupid child labor laws. Children just cost money and are a burden on the taxpayer.


On edit for the humor impaired: :sarcasm:

[lawodevolution]

64. Dead children is a gun control group priority

That's why they block the Eddie eagle child gun safety program

Child gun accidents are the bread and butter of the anti gun groups

[Altoid_Cyclist]

4. Stupid is as stupid does.

The NRA truly does epitomize the saying. What is left to say about an organization that still defends live pigeon shoots in Pennsylvania?

Maybe their national executives could come to this area and talk to the parents of children killed by guns that the parents kept loaded and within easy reach of their kids. Of course a lot of "adults" in this area have also accidentally shot either themselves or a family member while cleaning or handling an "unloaded" weapon.

I think that the NRA is shooting themselves in their feet on this law.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

5. When was the last time you went to the doctor because you had the flu....

...and he/she asked you if you owned a gun and if it were safely stored? WTF? This is just bullshit pandering.
It's like the whole "you can't say gay" bullshit in Tennessee. I don't remember teachers in school ever saying anything about sexuality, even in sex ed. It was about protecting yourself against STDs and pregnancy. They didn't discuss Gay, Lesbian or straight sex. It wasn't a how to. People are fucking morons. PERIOD.
Duckie

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. That is really stupid

I don't know that it's something that doctors should have to say anything about but there's nothing wrong with- in the interest of child safety- for doctors to be able to address this potential safety hazard IMHO. It's no different than somebody coming into the schools and talking about it there or about any other safety issues affecting children. What's the cry and hue about? :shrug:

Hey, I thought that the NRA was all about responsible gun ownership?

[jpak]

7. The GOP/NRA moran parade marches on - and shreds the First Amendment

yup

[marmar]

8. Good f**king Grief.....

When some future academic writes an opus on the decline of America, the NRA deserves its own chapter.

[pintobean]

9. Is there a law against telling a doctor to fuck off?

I see no need for this law. If parents can't figure out that they don't need to answer questions that are unrelated to their child's illness or injury, that's their problem.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoopla Phil]

24. And there in lies the problem. This whole issue arose as an

effort from an anti gun organization that decided to push their agenda through a pediatric association. It got all the pediatricians that were members of that association to put the "gun" question on their standard form. (Note it is a standard form and not a question do to some issue that is in question)

Now you say to just tell the pediatrician to "fuck off" and that did in fact happen, though not using your exact quote. The pediatrician refused medical service/care for the child as a result of refusing to answer the standard "gun" question.

I see the law as an important need to insure that children get the care they need from a pediatrician.

[pintobean]

27. Thanks for the info.

That really puts things in perspective.

I wouldn't use those exact words either, unless the pediatrician was persistent.

[yellowcanine]

10. That law will last about 5 seconds. Clearly unConstitutional.

[Upton]

11. Good..

It's none of the doctor's business..

I don't know that you need a law about it though. As a previous poster has suggested, just telling the pediatrician to fuck off should be sufficient..

[edhopper]

14. It might not be

You're entitled to that opinion. But to pass a law preventing the Dr from asking is irrational and unconstitutional. I would hope you would see the difference.

[joeybee12]

16. What BS...a pediatrician is concerned with the health AND SAfety of a child..

He or she will ask about whether household cleaning supplies are stored properly..those can be deadly also..Yes, it's ONLY COMMON SENSE that a doctor should ask about guns.

[edhopper]

13. Floridians certainly

have elected honest, wise and practical politicians of late.
Wonder if they will ever wake up. If not they deserve the crap hole their state will become.

[slackmaster]

15. There is nothing in the bill to stop doctors from giving out information about safe gun storage

Information that a gun is in your home could find its way to someone inclined to break in to steal the gun. It's none of a doctor's business whether or not a patient owns guns, unless the patient is adjudicated as mentally incompetent.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[edhopper]

18. So you think it was right

to pass a law censoring what a Dr can ask a patient?

[slackmaster]

20. No, I am fundamentally against restricting peoples' speech

I think a lot of the concerns expressed about the bill are overstated.

HTH

[edhopper]

21. You are not concerned about

a felony arrest of a Dr for asking about guns in the home. And if you think that is far fetched you simply have not been paying attention to law enforcement in FL.

[slackmaster]

23. As I said, I am against restricting peoples' speech

Saying that the authors of the bill don't care if children die is over the top.

[edhopper]

25. I never said that

I said it is censorship that makes Dr.s potential felons. You responded with a straw man argument about the law makers feelings. You neither condemn or oppose this law.

[slackmaster]

34. I don't live in Florida.

I don't have a dog in the fight.

[WatsonT]

19. Why should they ask?

Parents may not know which chemicals are dangerous. But likely they are aware that guns can kill. Like asking if they have any knives or blow torches in the house.

Or pools of standing water.

[thecrow]

22. Repubicons....

The party of *small* government.
Now invading a Doctor's conversation near you!

[toddwv]

26. This bill is a mess

Just reading over the summary:

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=44993

Seems like it's worded in such away that merely mentioning "firearm" could land the physician a felony arrest.

[struggle4progress]

28. We don't need pediatricians talking to parents about potentially dangerous situations in the home!

What's next? Asking parents whether they safely store their caustic household chemicals so toddlers can't drink them? Warning parents about the hazards of leaving young children unattended in tubs? Telling parents their kids should have bicycle helmets?

Where will this fascist oppression end?

Shut the fuck up, you meddlesome pediatricians! Shit happens!

The next time my kid drinks some bleach, then falls off her bike, comes home bleeding and accidentally shoots herself, then passes out and half-drowns in the bathtub, I don't want to hear yet another bullshit lecture about safety: the damn paramedics and emergency doctors should just do their job -- pump the kid's stomach, put a bandage on the concussion, do the surgery to remove the bullet, and hold her upside down to drain the water from her lungs, or whatever it is they did last time

[Hoyt]

29. Yep, the pediatricians have been embarrassing the TBaggers (who are for extending law to sex ed too)

[X_Digger]

30. Perhaps you missed the incident that spurred this?

http://www.ocala.com/article/20100723/NEWS/100729867/1402/NEWS

It was a question Amber Ullman least expected Wednesday from her children's pediatrician.

Do you keep a gun in the house?

When the 26-year-old Summerfield woman refused the answer, the Ocala doctor finished her child's examination and told her she had 30 days to find a new pediatrician and that she wasn't welcome at Children's Health of Ocala anymore.

I'll assume it wasn't intentional misdirection on your part.

[Hoyt]

31. Gunners have been bitching about this for years -- and mostly TBaggers.

Almost every state Medicaid agency requires this anticipatory guidance -- and I don't have a problem with it. It's not an issue that occurred because of one encounter.

I suspect there is more to the story than you cited (probably because NRA and gunners scrubbed the truth) -- Like maybe Amber was a ass to the doc. It's tough enough running a medical practice at what Medicaid, and even most private payers, reimburse for pediatric care. I can understand a doc saying "adios" to a non-cooperative patient. He discharged her with 30 days notice which is the way to do it.

[TPaine7]

32. I love how the antis "debate"

Faced with data, antis make up countering scenarios out of whole cloth:


"I suspect...probably {BS imaginary scenario made up on the spot}... Like maybe..."


Based on the fictional scenario, hard conclusions can be swiftly reached:

"I can understand"--of course you can understand, you made the whole thing up--"He discharged her...which is the way to do it."

Starting from nothing, an anti can make up a wild conspiracy story that makes whatever outcome he desires seem perfectly correct. And they wonder why they are losing in the court of public opinion--among other courts.

[X_Digger]

35. Must hurt terribly, being so paranoid..

Do you see NRA mind control beams on every traffic light?

"scrubbed the truth"..

Wrap another layer of tinfoil, you can still see to type, apparently.

[Hoyt]

36. Talk about fears, you guys fear a poor doctor might force one to think about impact of guns on kids.

[X_Digger]

38. Tell me Hoyt..

Does the NRA have a political officer in every newsroom, or is there just a master switch somewhere in NRA HQ that automatically "scrubs the truth" from news stories?

*snort*

You never fail to provoke a laugh.

[Hoyt]

47. Obviously, you don't have much experience with the lobbying going on around such a law.

I can assure you the incident you described was presented by the gun lobby (NRA or some right wing organization). It was not something that a legislator read in the local paper while sipping coffee and decided to introduce a law to get those nasty ole pediatricians.

[X_Digger]

50. More "I know it but I can't prove it" bullshit?

Why is it that your pit bull mouth keeps writing checks that your hummingbird ass can't cash? Never anything to back up what you say.

[Hoyt]

51. And what evidence backs up what you type?

[X_Digger]

53. When I make a claim of fact, I can provide facts.

Of course I don't make statements like, 'toters think..', 'cowboys want..', etc. I don't attempt to claim to know what's going on inside someone else's head without data to back it up.

If I say, "most people agree that the second amendment applies to individuals"- I back it up with the gallup poll results.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/108394/americans-agreement-supreme-court-gun-rights.aspx


Research. You should try it sometime.

[Hoyt]

60. XD, that doesn't support claim we were discussing. Shows me 20% in poll have read the 2nd A.

Plus, there is a difference between carrying and owning. The poll didn't address what type of guns, etc. In any event, 20% have clearly read and understood "A well regulated militia . . . .".

So what does that have to do with your claim that the Florida bill is all because some pediatrician dismissed a patient. Not a friggin thing.

[X_Digger]

62. Nice evasion.

The lawmaker who championed the bill in the FL House cited the news report.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=44993

And more specifically-
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=h0155e.JDC.DOCX&DocumentType=Analysis&BillNumber=0155&Session=2011

In recent months, there has been media attention surrounding an incident in Ocala, Florida, where, during a routine doctor’s visit, a pediatrician asked a patient’s mother whether there were firearms in the home. When the mother refused to answer, the doctor advised her that she had 30 days to find a new pediatrician.1

See that, Hoyt? That's called backing up what you say with fucking research. You should try it sometime.


eta: The footnote in the above quote? Points to this link: http://www.ocala.com/article/20100723/news/100729867/1402/news?p=1&tc=pg

[PavePusher]

52. Show him this, I've given up talking to him:

http://www.fairwarning.org/2011/05/florida-law-would-bar-doctors-from-asking-parents-about-guns/

"State Rep. Jason Brodeur, a Republican, proposed the bill after a much-publicized incident in which an Ocala, Fla., pediatrician told the mother of a 4-month-old boy to find another doctor when she refused to answer questions about guns in her home. Similar legislation has been proposed in Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama and North Carolina."

[Hoyt]

59. As I suspected, article proves NRA behind the bill.

[rl6214]

48. YUP

Everything is the fault of the NRA/GOP/TBAGGERS

Like there isn't anybody in the world that is not pro-gun that does not belong to one of these groups.

[struggle4progress]

40. ... "I don't tell them to get rid of the guns," he said. "The purpose is to give advice." He said

that more than half the families he treats have guns. Okonkwo said that during the summer, he also asks parents whether they have pools at their homes so he can advise them about water safety. And he asks young drivers whether they use their cell phones when they drive ... He said the doctor and patient have to develop a relationship of trust and that if parents won't answer such basic safety questions, they cannot trust each other about more important health issues ...
Family and pediatrician tangle over gun question
By Fred Hiers
Published: Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 6:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 11:52 a.m.
http://www.ocala.com/article/20100724/ARTICLES/7241001

[X_Digger]

41. The doctor could have simply said, "If you have any guns, here's information on securing them.."

That's all it would have taken. (And that's still allowed even after passage of this legislation.)

The sanctimonious prick should refer to his oath more frequently, and set aside his god complex.

[HankyDubs]

42. speaking of sanctimonious pricks

You think that a doctor should be fined for asking a patient a question? Wow.

By asking this question, the doctor is upholding his oath, not violating it:

The practice of medicine is a privilege which carries important responsibilities. All doctors should observe the core values of the profession which centre on the duty to help sick people and to avoid harm. I promise that my medical knowledge will be used to benefit people's health. They are my first concern. I will listen to them and provide the best care I can. I will be honest, respectful and compassionate towards patients. In emergencies, I will do my best to help anyone in medical need.

I will make every effort to ensure that the rights of all patients are respected, including vulnerable groups who lack means of making their needs known, be it through immaturity, mental incapacity, imprisonment or detention or other circumstance.

My professional judgement will be exercised as independently as possible and not be influenced by political pressures nor by factors such as the social standing of the patient. I will not put personal profit or advancement above my duty to patients.

I recognise the special value of human life but I also know that the prolongation of human life is not the only aim of healthcare. Where abortion is permitted, I agree that it should take place only within an ethical and legal framework. I will not provide treatments which are pointless or harmful or which an informed and competent patient refuses.

I will ensure patients receive the information and support they want to make decisions about disease prevention and improvement of their health. I will answer as truthfully as I can and respect patients' decisions unless that puts others at risk of harm. If I cannot agree with their requests, I will explain why.

If my patients have limited mental awareness, I will still encourage them to participate in decisions as much as they feel able and willing to do so.

I will do my best to maintain confidentiality about all patients. If there are overriding reasons which prevent my keeping a patient's confidentiality I will explain them.

I will recognise the limits of my knowledge and seek advice from colleagues when necessary. I will acknowledge my mistakes. I will do my best to keep myself and colleagues informed of new developments and ensure that poor standards or bad practices are exposed to those who can improve them.

I will show respect for all those with whom I work and be ready to share my knowledge by teaching others what I know.

I will use my training and professional standing to improve the community in which I work. I will treat patients equitably and support a fair and humane distribution of health resources. I will try to influence positively authorities whose policies harm public health. I will oppose policies which breach internationally accepted standards of human rights. I will strive to change laws which are contrary to patients' interests or to my professional ethics.

And from the story you quoted:

He said he asks such questions of all his patients because if there are guns in a home with children, he advises that parents lock them away so children don't hurt themselves.

“The purpose is to give advice… I don't tell them to get rid of the guns,” he said. “The purpose is to give advice.”

[X_Digger]

43. Where did I say that I agreed with the fine? Or this legislation, even?

If you're going to try to stuff words in my mouth, at least make them something that I might have actually said.

Did I say he was violating his oath by asking a question? Clean your glasses, I think they're fogged up from all that huffing and puffing.

Swing.. and a miss.. again.

The problem I have is refusing care. I despise it when it's pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for the morning after pill, fundie nurses refusing to treat gay or muslim patients, doctors refusing to care for Obama voters, or doctors refusing to treat patients based on whether or not they will answer questions about which rights they exercise.

[HankyDubs]

44. so you finally take a sane position!

This is a red-letter day!

You mentioned the oath--why did you mention it? Any reason in particular or were you just being yourself?

The problem I have is refusing care. I despise it when it's pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for the morning after pill, fundie nurses refusing to treat gay or muslim patients, doctors refusing to care for Obama voters, or doctors refusing to treat patients based on whether or not they will answer questions about which rights they exercise.

First of all, he didn't refuse care. He provided the care on that day, and then informed her she would need to seek another pediatrician in the future. He didn't refuse care because there was a gun in the home...again, from the article YOU CITED:

He said that more than half the families he treats have guns...

...When asked whether he explained to Ullman why he was asking about guns in her home, he said she was too defensive and snapped at him, saying “That it wasn't any of my business… so there was no point”

Okonkwo said the issue was not about whether the parents owned a gun...
...He said he respected a patient's right not to answer questions, but it was also his right to no longer treat them.

He refused care because she was nasty to him and refused to answer questions. If she is going to be uncooperative with her pediatrician, then he can certainly do without her as a patient.

[X_Digger]

45. It's a he said / she said

Ullman tells it a bit differently..

Ullman said Okonkwo – medical director of Children's Health of Ocala – wouldn't explain why he was asking the question.

“All he asked me was, ‘Are you refusing to answer the question?' and I said,'Yes, I'm refusing to answer the question,'” she said. “The questions stopped at that point.”

The only things they agree on is that-

a) Okonkwo asked whether or not there was a gun in the house.
b) Ullman refused to answer.
c) Okonkwo told her to find another pediatrician.

Had he simply said something to the effect of, "If you have guns in the home, here's information on securing them."

But hey, even the reporter picked up on a recent trend..

The American Association of Pediatrics urges pediatricians to ask questions of parents about gun ownership when they get children's medical histories and to suggest that parents remove guns from the home.

Here's an excerpt from an AAP book..
http://books.google.com/books?id=M-NIaWoUPucC&pg=PA470&lpg=PA470&dq=We+believe+that+handguns,+deadly+air+guns+and+assault+weapons+should+be+banned&source=bl&ots=hKzrq7Ewq8&sig=54PPNwCwO0JUpt6-LD0MDsouiBQ&hl=en&ei=WyTLTbihAcS5tgeV48WKCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=handguns%20banned&f=false

The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports gun-control legislation. We believe that handguns, deadly air guns and assault weapons should be banned.

Until handguns are banned, we recommend that handguns and handgun ammunition be regulated, that restrictions be placed on handgun ownership, and that the number of privately owned handguns be reduced.

So yes, without further knowledge of exactly what went on in the exam room, I tend to side with the mother, not the doctor using the above guidelines.

[HankyDubs]

46. of course you do

of course you tend to side with the angry gun owner snapping at people over nothing. Sounds like your kinda people.

That crazy American Academy of Pediatrics...caring about children. The nerve!

[X_Digger]

49. The organization that supports gun bans? Surely one of their members wouldn't say what they do..

*gasp* no.. never happen.

[beevul]

61. Open mouth, insert foot.

"I will ensure patients receive the information and support they want to make decisions about disease prevention and improvement of their health."


One certainly can not know if they want information or support from their doctor about safe firearms storage, unless the doctor asks if they want that information and/or support. Asking if a patient owns guns on the other hand, is none of his/her business. Period. Not only is it none of the doctors business, its not NECESSARY to ask that question, in determining if a patient wants support and/or information on safe gun storage.

Call me old fashioned, but words actually MEAN things.

The word "want", specifically.

[struggle4progress]

54. I myself don't shout "sanctimonious prick!" at everyone with views different from my own.

[X_Digger]

56. Nor do I. Whatever gave you that idea? n/t

[PavePusher]

66. "Do you own guns?" is not a safety question.

"Would you like some info about gun safety?" is a safety question.

A nuanced distinction, to be sure...

[Common Sense Party]

33. Do the pediatricians ask the parents if their illegal narcotics are safely stored?

Booze? Cleaning supplies? Matches?

[Euromutt]

37. Not to the best of my memory

And my son's latest check-up was just over a month ago, for the record.

As I've said in another thread, I consider this law to be the equivalent of using a sledgehammer to swat a mosquito, but some of the objections I've been reading are pretty disingenuous, along the lines of "well, we also ask about x, y and z" when in actual fact, they don't.

[Common Sense Party]

39. I don't remember ever being asked or scolded about any of those things.

I guess our family doctors always assumed we have common sense.

Consistency is the key. If the doctor regularly asks about matches and chemicals and drugs, then yes, he/she should ask about guns as well.

But if the doctor SINGLES OUT guns, then that's just a political agenda at work.

[struggle4progress]

55. In the news in the last 24 hours:

Thursday, May 12, 2011
Cops: Clarkston toddler shot by teen
By Christian Boone
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
A 2-year-boy was still in surgery early Thursday morning after being shot in the chest by a 13-year-old at a Clarkston apartment complex, police say ... http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/cops-clarkston-toddler-shot-943256.html

Phoenix shooting: Girl, 2, shot in face, grandfather arrested
by Ben Backhaus and Karen Schmidt on May. 11, 2011
The grandfather of a 2-year-old who was shot in the face in Phoenix on Tuesday was taken into custody in connection with a weapons violation ... http://tucsoncitizen.com/arizona-news/2011/05/11/phoenix-shooting-girl-2-shot-in-face-grandfather-arrested/

Charges could be filed against Indio man for accidental shooting of child
Thursday, May 12th, 2011
Issue 19, Volume 15.
INDIO - Charges could be filed today against an Indio man allegedly responsible for allowing a gun to fall into the hands of a child who accidentally shot a 7-year-old girl on Sunday ... http://www.myvalleynews.com/story/56169/

Child injured while playing with gun
10:42 PM, May 11, 2011
St. Louis, MO (KSDK) - A local man could face child endangerment charges following a shooting that sent a child to the hospital. It's being called an accidental shooting, with a 10-year-old as the victim. It happened inside a home in the 2100 block of Chippewa in South St. Louis City. Police say they got the call for help at 6:18 p.m. Wednesday. When they arrived, they found a 10-year-old child with injuries to his eye. Police say after investigating they learned the 10-year-old victim and his 16-year-old friend were playing with a gun they found inside a drawer in the home ... http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/258563/3/Child-injured-while-playing-with-gun

Thursday, May 12, 2011
Bus Driver Saves Students from Gun-Wielding Seventh Grader
George Doyle/Stockbyte (CHARLOTTE, N.C.) -- A bus driver in North Carolina is being hailed as a hero after convincing a gun-wielding seventh grader to hand over his loaded weapon during a terrifying bus ride. The 12-year-old boy tried to hijack the school bus to Washington so he could shoot government officials, witnesses told ABC News Charlotte affiliate WSOC-TV. Driver Evans Okoduwa said Tuesday that while he was scared during Monday's incident, he knew that if he didn't get the child to drop his weapon he "could have been shot" ... http://www.masoncountydailynews.com/news/national-news/6330-bus-driver-saves-students-from-gun-wielding-seventh-grader

[X_Digger]

57. News trumps facts, eh?

(from CDC's wisqars: http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html )



(http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/nonfatal.html )

[one-eyed fat man]

58. Slick productions

Cease Fire PSA

The plot of the PSA is as follows:

A child opens a closet door and looks at the top shelf. He drags a chair to the front of the closet and stacks books and boxes on the seat. He climbs up and reaches for a gun on the top shelf.

MICHAEL DOUGLAS (voice over):

If you think your kids aren't old enough to find your handgun, think again.

The child turns the gun around, pointing it at his face. We hear a SHOT and we see a graphic with the following statistic: "10 children are killed by a handgun every day." The Cease Fire logo and web page address appear.

Part of the reason this ad is effective is it uses the image of a toddler to fix an image in your mind, then goes on to say 10 children a day are killed by a handgun EACH DAY. TEN A DAY!!! That's 3,650 children a year who the sponsors of the ad want you to believe are preschoolers who blasted themselves by finding a loaded gun "hidden" in the home. The intent is to have you tie the number "ten a day" to the image of "children" as innocent young toddlers. They want the viewer to be "gut-hooked" by the image of the innocent toddler.

2007 was the last year the CDC reported this. But as you can see firearm accidents for kids, and defining EVERYONE UNDER AGE 18 as a kid to get the widest possible range range, is 8th on the list. If you use age 10 and under, then firearm accidents are not even in the top 10.

1 - Unintentional Motor Vehicle Traffic = 3,644
2 - Unintentional Drowning = 844
3 - Unintentional Fire/burn = 458
4 - Unintentional Poisoning = 379
5 - Unintentional Suffocation = 280
6 - Unintentional Pedestrian, Other = 208
7 - Unintentional Other Land Transport = 196
8 - Unintentional Firearm = 111


http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadca...

According to the CDC, if you even if you define everyone under voting age as a child the number is 111. If you pick the 4-5 age group as shown in the PSA it is 14.

So how do you turn 14 accidents a year into 10 a day, besides just flat out lie??

First, expand your definition of child. Why not define everyone as "children" up to age 23? After all the IRS will let you count your college student offspring as dependents at 23. Second, why stop at accidents when you can include suicides, homicides, and legal intervention?

This is a big boost to the numbers as the crime rate follows the proportion of young males in the population. Both the victims and the perpetrators of crime tend to fall in the 18-25 age category. This way you get to count in homicides both innocent victims, and any criminals dispatched by the police.

One of the leading causes of death amongst teenagers is suicide. The Centers for Disease control report that it is the third leading cause of death, behind accidents (all types of accidents, mostly motor vehicle) and homicide, of people aged 15 to 24. Even more disturbing is the fact that suicide is the fourth leading cause of death for children between the ages of 10 and 14.

The most delicious irony is that this very ad and its deconstruction are course materials in a class on propaganda techniques as an example. For further discussion on techniques used to manipulate a message: techniques, part II

It's still a lie, even if it is well thought out exceedingly deceptive and slickly produced lie. The fact that people still swallow it hook, line and sinker at how effective the technique is.

[HALO141]

63. Unnecessary, IMO.

Is it the doctor's business? No. But I resist the notion that I (or anyone else) is unable to simply look the doc straight in the eye and tell him so.

"Tell you what, doc... Your fee for an office visit is $80. Coincidentally, that's the same as my consulting rate on firearms safety. I do, however, charge a $20 travel fee so if you really want to go down this road I'd be happy to. Then you can give me my $20 and we'll be on our way."