ACP Offers Policy Recommendations For Reducing Gun-Related Injuries, Deaths In US

[SecularMotion]

A new policy paper from the American College of Physicians (ACP) offers nine strategies to address the societal, health care, and regulatory barriers to reducing firearms-related violence, injuries, and deaths in the United States. Reducing Firearm-Related Injuries and Deaths in the United States is published today in the peer-reviewed medical journal, Annals of Internal Medicine.

Principal among ACP’s nine strategic imperatives is the recommendation to approach firearm safety as a public health issue so that policy decisions are based on scientific evidence. As such, ACP strongly supports universal criminal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of felons, persons with mental illnesses that put them at greater risk of harming themselves or others, people with substance use disorders, and others who current regulations prohibit from owning guns.

The United States has the highest firearm-related mortality rate among industrialized nations. ACP believes that a comprehensive, multifaceted approach is necessary to reduce this epidemic of gun violence and that physicians play a vital role.

“Patients have long trusted their physicians to advise them on issues that affect their health,” said Molly Cooke, MD, FACP, president of ACP. “Physicians can play a critical role in educating the public on the risks of firearm ownership and the need for firearm safety through their encounters with their patients. ACP strongly believes the patient-physician relationship should be protected from laws that prevent physicians from initiating a discussion about guns.”

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113119284/acp-offers-policy-recommendations-for-reducing-gun-related-injuries-deaths-in-us/

[bossy22]

1. how many people in the U.S. are hurt every year because of faulty designed weapons?

ACP recommends that guns be subject to consumer product regulations regarding access, safety and design. In addition, the College supports law enforcement measures to aid in the identification of weapons used in crimes.
Read more at http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113119284/acp-offers-policy-recommendations-for-reducing-gun-related-injuries-deaths-in-us/#Lcu0WBwxMgAvmL63.99

the answer is very little if any. So I ask, why do we need this?

[flamin lib]

4. Consumer product regulations cover a lot more than design flaws.

But I'm guessing you knew that.

[DonP]

2. So, the ACP already solved the 100,000+ medical error deaths they cause annually I guess?

And now they are going to help us with gun deaths.

I'm sure they have already addressed the 100,000 (low estimate) to 300,000 (medium estimate) people they kill with preventable medical errors, or they wouldn't be mucking about in something they know nothing about, like most gun control people?

Maybe then they can help us understand when to get our transmission flushed or when to bet on red in Vegas.

Trying to recycle the old "guns are a health issue" isn't going to work for the 12th time it's tried either. But feel free to keep throwing the same old discredited shit against the wall time after time and wonder, "Gee I wonder why nothing works".

[flamin lib]

3. Absolutely!!

All or nothing! Fix every other thing! Leave guns for last!

[clffrdjk]

5. Why don't those 100,000 people matter to you?

[flamin lib]

7. OK, let's play by gungeon rules.

You post a link. I'll say it the stats are flawed. Then I'll throw out a red herring (like this one). Then we can insult each other etc, etc,etc. Lather rinse and repeat.


Don't you realize what you've done? You don't want to talk about gun deaths so you offer a distraction that has absolutely nothing to do with the OP.

Kinda like the other thread where a number of gungeoneers took it upon them selves to lecture a Supreme Court Justice on the Constituion.

[clffrdjk]

8. I don't have a link, because I did not make any claim.

My comment was a sarcastic remark on your posting style. You have personally accused me of not caring about gun deaths, I thought it was incredibly funny that you were so quick to dismiss literally 3 to 10 times as many deaths.

[flamin lib]

9. I can't deal with this fuzzy approach to a "discussion".

DonP weighs in, you apparently agree as you cite his post. Now you suddenly disavow that post and you seemingly don't agree that 100,000 people die due to medical malpractice? But that makes no difference to the APC study. You could as well have replied that frost kills orange trees in Florida as neither the supposed malpractice deaths nor the orange trees have anything to do with the findings of the APC.

Look, do you want to discuss the OP or not?

If you want to run down the rabbit hole of Don's red herring take it up with him, if you want to discuss the APC study I'll be waiting.

[clffrdjk]

11. Here let me help you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=141925
I saw hypocrisy and thought I would point it out. Sorry if that is too much for you.

What do you want to discuss about the op? An advocacy group advocated for something big deal. The only thing the article told me was that if I see a study from them I should be suspicious.

[flamin lib]

12. Well,there you have it. Didn't care in that thread, don't care I this one.

Much more interested in dissing suggestions for reducing gun deaths than thinking about them.

You need to look up logical fallacies and see if it might be possible avoid them.

I stand by it; you don't care about 30,000 deaths as long as you have your guns. You've done it twice now.

Now, would you like to discuss any of the suggestions that might reduce gun violence?

[clffrdjk]

13. Lol and I stand by my reply to that comment.

And now #5 in this thread becomes more relevant.

Could you please point out a few of my logical fallacies?

What have I done twice now? If it is what I am thinking my next question will be for proof, but you knew that already.

I already asked what about the op do you want to talk about, now what suggestions do you want to talk about?

[flamin lib]

15. Jesus this is becoming tedious.

Yes I care about all negligent deaths BUT the SOP for this group is Gun Control, RKBA and self defense. Why the hell bring up something not in the SOP except to distract from Gun Control, RKBA and self defense? You want to talk about medical malpractice? Take it to GD.

You tied yourself to DonP's post #5. In it he committed two fallacies; attack the source and red herring. You bought it, pay for it.

Twice you have had the opportunity to discuss reducing gun violence and twice you have refused to do so. I can only conclude that you don't care about gun violence, at least not enough to think about it.

What do I want to discuss? Fucking anything involving the OP, the report cited or something involving the SOP of this group.

You want to keep chasing red herrings about medical malpractice or what?

How about universal background checks for every transfer? How about mandatory safety training annually? How about mandatory storage requirements?

[clffrdjk]

18. So you can't even point out one logical fallacy of mine.

And you are still somehow still missing the fact that #5 was a satire of you.

My ideas on reducing gun violence have very little to do with guns. First up start with the big numbers, suicide we need to do more to identify and treat depression. Next up gang violence, that one is tougher, increased social programs to increase socioeconomic mobility. Give people hope that there is a future within the system and they will be less likely to go outside the system. How about we start pursuing straw purchasers.

Not even the op thinks the article is worth discussing, I told you my thoughts on the article it is basically worthless. You would think doctors would understand the idea of treating the cause and not the symptoms. But hey if they want to be an advocacy group that is their business.

Universal background checks, well that depends on how they are implemented, open up the phones so anyone can call in I like that idea, force me to pay someone else to call the same number not so much.

Mandatory safety training no I see no reason to support that. It will do nothing for suicides or gang violence.

Mandatory storage requirements same as above.
Pick a goal then work toward that goal, putting more restrictions on me and other legal gun owners will do nothing to meet the goal of reducing gun violence

[flamin lib]

19. Finally!!

I will get back to you tomorrow cause its late. But I welcome constructive discourse even if it takes many many exchanges to get the conversation started.

[flamin lib]

22. OK, I'm back as long as the 4 year old I care for isn't in my lap.

I may be periodically unavailable, but its good work if you can get it.

#5 was definitely NOT satire. It was an attempt to distract me from the discussion at hand by asking me to defend a position I didn't take.

First let me say I like your approach, work on the problem with priorities. Not to say we can't multitask and address more than segment at a time. A lot of the suicides are veterans and the VA is making progress in getting help to them. A little fucking late to the party but at least they've finally come to the party. The rest of the population is more difficult because of HIPPA and patient privacy. That said, Doctors should be released from those restrictions and encouraged to report the few, and thankfully rare, cases that may be a danger to themselves or others. Its a tough call because even the most severe cases of schizoid behavior are usually harmless.

Supposing that this, thankfully small, segment of the population can be identified what to do? Should their weapons be impounded until they are well? How does that happen if nobody knows if or how many guns they have? A registry? Sure, other methods of suicide are possible, but none quite as efficient as guns. My ex-SIL attempted suicide by pharmacy but was discovered, helped and now has moved on with life.

The issue of identifying suicidal people is first, getting g them help is second but protecting them while they get better has to be part of the package. These are issues that have to be addressed to be effective in preventing self inflicted death by gun. Give them some thought.

Gang violence is not as big a problem as it might seem, only 1 in 5 homicides is related to gangs but still 20% is a sizable number. Alongside the socioeconomic efforts in the long run things can be done in the near term. Where do the gangs, and other criminals get their weapons? I'm told by other gungeoneers that theft, straw buyers and traffickers are the primary sources and I see no reason to doubt that. Two things will make a major dent in that supply chain: universal background checks and legally mandated safe storage. The storage would have the added benefit of keeping children safe from unattended guns.

I understand your problem with restricted access to NICS, but along with that access comes the legal requirement maintain records of source and disposition of any guns transferred. FFLs and C&Rs have to turn those records over when the licenses expire. If I were an individual seller I'd happily pay somebody $25 (going rate here) to take that responsibility.

The objection to gun safes seems to be the cost. A very serviceable handgun safe can be had for about $60. Considering the cost of even an inexpensive hand gun, short of a 7.62 Nagant, (and who would want one of those for self defense? I could have gunfight in a walk-in closet and not hit anything with mine) that's not that much money. Long guns safes are more expensive but can still be had on sale for under $100. I agree that those safes aren't the most effective against a determined criminal but they will sure make it a lot of work and most thrives are averse to work, hence their proclivity to steal.

Mandatory training is more than just a range trip and the legal responsibility. It should include best practices for the above mentioned safe storage and basic gun safety. Gun safety begin s between the ears, and there's a lot "Dam, I didn't think of that!" that goes on in classes. Existing gun owners would have to be Grandfathered in cause there's just too many of them for a system to handle, but first time buyers (who would benefit the most) could get a card and be done with it.

The off repeated refrain is "If its mandated the government should pay for it (or heavily subsidize it). If you can afford the gun you can afford the rest of it and nobody should ask to be bribed into responsibility.

Now I'll see if I can still edit the post I used to disparage you, if not I'll post an addendum to it as you clearly have given thought to gun violence. Would that we could erase all the exchanges between here and there.

[DonP]

6. Even though gun related deaths are dropping and medical deaths are rising, sure

So the 100,000+ that die from preventable medical errors are not your concern obviously?

Nothing to act morally superior about to "compensate", huh?

Much better to have them focus on something they know nothing about than deal with their own homicides.

[flamin lib]

10. See post 9. nt

[DonP]

14. I know, expecting a gun control "Fan" to find their own data is a challenge ...

... what with having to drink your ice tea and type at the same time.

Here's one from the Times, but a little Google Fu will produce others citing as high as 210,000+ preventable medical deaths a year by these learned physicians.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/opinion/more-treatment-more-mistakes.html?_r=0

And preventable medical deaths and "malpractice" are two different sources of people killed by the physicians you want to trust.

So, tell us what you do to support your beliefs in the real world? Besides whining and snarking online of course? Do you collect cartoons to share with the other kids?

[flamin lib]

16. WTF has this to do with Gun Control, RKBA or self defense?

Its a red herring and you've pulled an ad honeniem in one post! Fact is damn few gungeoneers want to talk about gun violence. Some do but the threads are pitifully short.

Take the medical death thread to GD. Talk about gun violence here. Stay with the SOP.

My beliefs are supported by any number of studies, surveys, peer reviewed articles and personal experience. All of which will make no difference to someone adept at ignoring the nose on their face.

I am emphatically not a gun control fan, control those who have access to guns who have a reason to be denied that access.

Now, you want to talk about gun violence or what?

[DonP]

17. Now, now, calm down

We all know gun violence continues to drop even with gun sales at record highs.

Why I bet even some of the ACP physicians, that kill more than 3 times the number of Americans every year that guns do and that you want to let decide what gun laws should be put in place, actually know that too.

"Your beliefs"? It's awful nice to know you have a faith to cling to.

[flamin lib]

20. Belief was your word. Science is my faith. If you want to talk reduction in

gun violence and stay in the SOP of the group we can talk, if not, that's okay with me too.

Gun violence has been flat for the last decade after a large decrease beginning in the 70s that mirrors the decline in households with guns and the number of gun dealers. Auto deaths have declined due to increased safety regulation such that 16 states now report more gun deaths than auto deaths.

Going to bed now.

[ManiacJoe]

21. Link to the actual article:

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1860325

Way too much fluff in that redorbit.com summary.