Latest Headlines
- Century Woman Charged With Smuggling Meth Into County Jail
- EREC Walnut Hill Office Closed For Renovations
- One On One With Sidewalk Prophets (Their Live Concert Is Tonight In Atmore For $5)
- No Injuries When Toyota Collides With Semi Truck On Highway 29
- Photos: Molino Library Hosts Back To School Bash
- Florida’s Back To School Sales Tax Holiday Continues
- Hot With More Afternoon Showers And Storms
- Here Are This Week’s Road Construction Delay Spots
- Wahoos Game Suspended Again by More Chattanooga Rain
- Band Camp Tradition: Tate High Showband Preps For The Upcoming Season (With Gallery)
Doctors File Suit Over Gun Ownership Question Bill
June 7, 2011
Pushing back against the National Rifle Association, a group of physicians on Monday filed suit in a Miami federal court to nullify a controversial measure prohibiting health practitioners from routinely asking their patients if they own guns and have them properly stored.
In a battle pitting the First Amendment against the Second Amendment, attorneys representing pediatricians and family doctors are asking U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke to throw out the recently approved measure (HB 155) they say steps illegally between a patient and their physician by limiting the types of questions practitioners can ask.
The complaint, filed in the Southern District of Florida, contends that prohibiting what physicians and their patients can talk about is unconstitutional.
“By severely restricting such speech and the ability of physicians to practice such preventative medicine, the Florida statute could result in grievous harm to children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly,” the complaint reads. “The First Amendment does not permit such a gross and content-based intrusion on speech and, accordingly, the court should declare the ‘Physician Gag Law’ unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement.”
The bill easily passed both chambers along largely party line votes – 88-30 in the House and 27-10 in the Senate.
The legislation appears to have originated after an Ocala couple complained that their doctor had told them to find another physician after they refused to disclose whether they owned guns and how they were stored.
Physicians say questions about gun ownership is often part of routine screenings done in many doctor’s offices, included in a battery of questions including such safety questions as whether poisons are kept in the home or if medicines are safely stored.
Backers say ownership is a constitutionally protected right, making it different from other possible potential hazards doctors might ask about.
Florida NRA lobbyist Marion Hammer could not be reached for comment Monday.
“We pay doctors to be doctors and give us medical care,” Hammer said in an interview with the Capital News Service last week. “Instead, they are trying to be social workers and bring their gun-ban politics into the examining room.”
Lawmakers this year also passed a measure (HB 45) that prohibits cities and counties from passing gun ordinances that are tougher than state law. That bill passed along similar party-line votes in the House and Senate on votes of 85-33 and 30-8 respectively with a few Democrats crossing the aisle.
Originally opposed to the bill dealing with doctors’ questions, the Florida Medical Association withdrew its opposition after changes were made allowing physicians, nurses and other practitioners to ask questions about gun ownership if they feel the patient or a family member might be in danger.
By Michael Peltier
The News Service of Florida
Comments
28 Responses to “Doctors File Suit Over Gun Ownership Question Bill”
REGARDING:
“If you look at what happened in the Balkans, Christians defending themselves and here comes the U.N..”
I could be wrong but as I remember it, whoever had the most firepower and numbers slaughtered those who had neither. It followed the breakup of a stable but brutal government. Any government may fail at some time. Every government fails in some ways at all times. All are made of people and people vary.
One specific example being discussed lately involved UN “safe areas” where Muslim minorities were encouraged to gather. Ratko Mladic was recently extradited for trials involving the slaughter of 8000 in Srebrenica. He claimed he was moving them to another safe place. What he actually ordered was to take them off, shoot them and bury them in mass graves.
I understand some call this “Christian,” but I’m pretty sure Christ won’t when he stands before Him at the final judgment.
I understand some call this action “defense,” but I’ve never seen how it would qualify as defense to kill defenseless people. Ratko bragged he was getting even for something done centuries before.
By the way, this doesn’t involve guns even though guns were involved. It involves the willingness of some of us to kill at the drop of a hat.
David with different definitions
SW said…”Thanks for the spirited debate.”
I said…(chuckle) You are more than welcome. I look forward to discussions that are not simply troll bait,which we see plenty of on here (and, of course, on any other forum where the participants are largely anonymous). I look forward to our next meeting. I, like you, grow tired of this debate, where it is obvious we can each make our points from now until Doomsday (next week?) without changing minds.
Your points are indeed well stated. Backed? Nope. (laugh)
Good luck.
Great twist of words which tells me you have no other legitimate argument; a common liberal tactic.
I believe my argument has been well stated and backed.
Thanks for the spirited debate.
SW said…”You make my argument for me.”
I said…You don’t have an argument, at least not a coherent one. All you can really come up with is “I’m frightened and anyone who isn’t is a dern liberal.”
But thanks for your final remark where you made *my* point. You stated that if I *am* a liberal, my argument holds water.So, I’ll take the mantle for now. Of course you also mentioned that “you fear” which, after all, is what this law is about.
eab,
Doctors interact with each other on a regular basis. Those with an agenda will tell each other who not to take on as a patient. Walking across the street to get a new doctor is not so easy and a very useless flippant answer. You are clearly an anti-gun person trying to use this issue to further your views and personal agenda. You’re just not brave enough to publicly state your desire for gun control that restricts the rights of law abiding Floridians.
@eab
You make my argument for me. “Actually, doctors can and do ask about chemicals, animals etc. if they suspect certain disorders.” At what point would a physician need to know if I had a firearm in my house? I would argue that unless I am there being treated for a gunshot wound or an assault wound (from being beaten by it), they have no business knowing-or even asking the question. I believe relevance is the key, here.
I re-state, this is a back door argument for gun control; it is in no way restricting the freedom of a physician-they can still inquire about guns if they are treating a relevant case. The law is preventative and, I would argue, proactive.
I can walk across the street for now; who can say that later, a law would be passed to ask and report gun ownership? I stated that argument in my earlier post.
I fear your argument holds no water, unless you carry it for a liberal agenda.
429SCJ….the American Way of sending guns through the mail died out when one of our presidents was murdered with one. I sure miss the days of being able to mail whatever we want.Oh for the good old days when we had our freedom,eh? If we found someone we wanted to shoot, all we had to do was wait by the mailbox until our firearm came in.
As for the Balkans, you must be a Slobodan man. Actually your misunderstanding of this conflict is pretty common. It is more of an ethnic conflict than a religious one. I haven’t checked the figures but I think the only country in the immediate struggle that has a Muslim majority is Bosnia. And we know what happened to Sarajevo.
Or do we?
If you look at what happened in the Balkans, Christians defending themselves and here comes the U.N.. A few people have lived long enough to see a pattern. I remember seeing the WWII film band of Brothers, on mail call one of the young troops recieved a pistol from his hometown police force. If I had mailed my son his pistol to Iraq I would be locked up. How does the blood that flowed through the veins of those Americans differ from the blood of my son and me. How did we change? Its not so much paranoia as it is respect of the American way, or once what was.
Cindy….thanks for making my point. If y’all are afraid your doctor is going to interrogate you about your guns, just go to Cindy’s.
SW…..Nonsense. All you gotta do is walk across the street and get another doctor. Or refuse to answer. The conservative agenda is to shout “less regulation, more freedom”, while passing laws to restrict the freedom of a business owner (doctor). So your point is that conservatives leave people alone by passing more laws and regulations?
Actually, doctors can and do ask about chemicals, animals etc. if they suspect certain disorders. You may wanna hide your Chihuahua under your bed. And stash that Miracle-Gro.
This is unneeded legislation passed simply to pander to a political base of fearful, paranoid folks. I’ll tell anyone who asks…I own guns. If y’all are scared, get behind me. More and more laws and regulation are not the answer.
“By severely restricting such speech and the ability of physicians to practice such preventative medicine, the Florida statute could result in grievous harm to children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly,” the complaint reads. “The First Amendment does not permit such a gross and content-based intrusion on speech and, accordingly, the court should declare the ‘Physician Gag Law’ unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement.”
This is the biggest bunch of crap I have seen in a while. Thank God my Doctor would never be a part of this . He would be one of the first to say gun policies have no place in a Doctor’s office. NRA we need your help again.
Fear and Paranoia does sounds like a Doctor Issue to me….good luck.
@eab
You would normally be right about conservatives being against more legislation. However, this is a preemptive strike against those who, for whatever agenda, refuse to just leave people alone. Unfortunately, anti-gun advocates are not unlike many liberals; they don’t quit and they think that they can, by use of government, force their agenda on others.
Conservatives, generally, are for small government, that adheres to its constitution, and doesn’t interfere with the free market. Liberals, however, don’t see it that way. They think government is supposed to care for us cradle to grave. If they would let each person pursue their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; whatever it might be within legal bounds, then legislation such as this wouldn’t be necessary. Conservatives have to think 2 moves ahead, not unlike playing chess.
We are frightened! We stay alert and prepare, that’s why nothing has happened to this point. One slip-up and…. It’s kinda like a former Israel leader said (paraphrased)-they can keep coming at us and losing, we can only lose once. Have you ever seen a law withdrawn? (the septic tank inspection thing comes to mind)
One should never lose their fear of government; it is at that point that the government will become tyrannical and uncontrollable-something our government is on the verge of, anyway. I for one, don’t trust government at any level, regardless who is in control of it.
Any legislation restricting gun ownership is bad. By the way, have you seen the latest reports on UN restriction attempts on gun control?
I will refuse to answer that question, regardless of how this thing turns out.
Question: What if the doctor refuses to treat a person because someone owns a gun and/or refuses to answer the question or what if legislation is passed requiring the doctor to report and requires the doctor to not treat someone who doesn’t complete the ’survey’, could that then result in a lawsuit against the doctor? That’s not good for doctors, now, is it? It certainly is not good for us, it can only result in higher doctor bills or fewer doctors who are willing to risk it.
Gee, why stop at guns? Why not include chemicals, gardens, animals, certain types of automobiles, etc? Where would it stop?
No, I don’t trust government. We should all have a healthy distrust; enough to question and demand answers and accountability of our elected officials.
It saddens me to hear so many of my fellow citizens terrified and paranoid,For more than 30 years we have been listening to peoples unfounded fears about gun control, and look….you can still buy one anytime.For all this time y;all have been frightened of nothing, It’s really heartbraking to see so many people so terrified that “they” are gonna come and take my gun! Oh Lord, what’ll I do?
So someone comes up wirh an idea conservatives are supposed to be against in principle…passing more laws and legal mandates. And now they will have to defend this silly thing in court costing all of us money.
Folks! Loase your fears. Stand up like real Americans and tell your doctor no! This is a tempest in a teapot,although an expensive one.
Doctors in Miami, I wonder what special interest could be in Miami? They! ask, do not tell!
This is a gun control issue plain and simple. The medical groups that are suing want all guns out of their patients houses. These pediatrician groups have been advocating total removal of guns from any home where children are present for a decade. They are using the same lawyers that Handgun Control Inc./Brady Campaign uses to try to strip rights from lawful gun owners. These doctors are putting your name into their computer data bases as a gun owner. They will record how many and how you store them if given the info. Their data bases are open to other doctors, insurance companies, your employers and LE. The only protection the patient has is how this info is used, but it is not blocked as many believe. If a doctor wants to take away or restrict your rights as a legal gun owner what will stop them from furthering his/her agenda by not releasing gun owner info? Nothing. This is gun control tactics plain and simple, The first step is to form a data base.
The gvmnt. will do anything to get info on us, because the less they know the less they can control. Doctors need to doctor and what kind of guns and where they are has nothing to do with why I’m sick or need stitches.It’s a tactic is all. darryl is nieve I think.
This is a back-door approach to gun control or other constricting legislation.
An example, I was bitten by my own cat recently and had to go to the doctor to get it treated. The next day I was visited by the health department.
What’s to say that legislation won’t be passed requiring doctors to report to local authorities every time a patient answers that question ‘yes’? Let’s say you go do the doctor to get treatment for an allergy and your answer to the ‘gun ownership’ question is ‘yes’. The next day after you went to the doctor for that allergy treatment, the local law enforcement agency pays you a visit to inquire further about your gun ownership. What’s to say that this legislation enables the media access? Now everyone in the neighborhood, town, county, etc., knows you own guns. Can you imagine the harassment that could follow?
I, for one, don’t want anyone to know whether or not I own guns. That might be just the edge I need to fend off someone wishing to do me or my family harm.
Doctors-just do doctor stuff, okay?
whodat said…”Anyone (ie. doctors, friends, strangers, ministers) can ask me anything they like. I reserve the right not to answer.”
I said…Well put, whodat. Thank you for a voice of reason. There was no law needed for this. All you gotta do is tell your doctor you won’t answer this or go to another doctor. We certainly don’t need all these new laws and regulations the Republicans are pushing down our throats.
Doesn’t a business owner have the right to run his/her business the way they want to without Greg Evers and Rickie Scott shackling them with new burdensome rules? Doctors are,after all, just trying to run a business and hopefully do some good. When they are not conspiring to take people’s guns, that is.
I understand that people are frightened but if you are afraid of your doctor, find another. Or better yet, speak with him/her about your fears of a shadowy, nefarious plot by “them” to have your doctor confiscate your weapons. He or she just may be able to help you with your fear.
Looks like the libs *are* dealing with it, SW. By the time this is litigated all the way through the courts, none of us will be able to afford ammo. The wisdom of the NRA…..not!
@ tallyho LOVE IT!
@ Chris
FSS 90.501-90.510 for reference in FL.
@Chris,
Nope; not like attorney/client or husband/wife.
Case in point-abuse, shooting, assault, animal bites, etc.
Not to confuse with confidentiality under HIPA (sp).
Medical information can be subpoenaed into court and doctors compelled to testify by summons. Not so with privileged communications.
Dealing with it.
Hey SW, the doctor-patient relationship/communication IS privileged. Deal with it.
Wow, a doctor wants to mention ways to improve the home surroundings such as when young children are around, and everyone is up in arms as if they were being slapped in the face? This has nothing to do with ownership rights, but just making sure a home is secure. Poisons and cleaners are legal to own too, but getting some friendly advice to make sure they, and guns, are properly stored should not be seen as some infringement on someone’s right, unless it is the right to be dumb. And based on some of the articles of dumb things people do even covered in this website, the notion of giving advice on safety should not be an issue.
I’m about as much of a Second Amendment absolutist as there can be, but this law is silly. How does a doctor asking about guns infringe on anyone’s rights? You certainly have the right to tell him to “Stuff it!” and seek care elsewhere. In fact, I want doctors to feel free to ask about this– it will reveal the ones I would wish to avoid…
Why didn’t the state legislature do something significant for gun rights? Allowing permitless CCW would be a great start as would working to repeal the stupid three-day wait for most pistol buyers. Frivolous laws like this one just serve to make Greg Evers appear to be working for gun rights while actually accomplishing little of substance.
Anyone (ie. doctors, friends, strangers, ministers) can ask me anything they like. I reserve the right not to answer.
Hey Doc i want a bill that tells me if you have AIDS before you put your hands on me, I have that right don’t i ACLU? I want to know Doc how much money you get from drug companys to push there line of medication and vacation from drug compa;nys. That would be a good law, would it not ACLU?
Hey Doc, it’s none of your business if I own a gun.
If I remember correctly, Dr./patient is not privileged communication; oh, by the way, privileged communication is decided by who? Oh yeah, the state.
Deal with it, libs.