Ease up, guys. No Big Brother involved. And alsaqr has the right idea - this is about epidemiology. Physicians are increasingly looking at health risk factors and some consider firearms to be a indicator of statistical risk.
Here's an example of the kind of study the doctor in question was probably participating in. This passage explains the reasoning:
Our findings describe the current motivations for firearm ownership and also provide information on the similarities and differences among owners of different types of guns. This information can assist in designing a more appropriate firearm injury policy as well as understanding the denominator of exposure when evaluating injury prevention interventions.
According to that report, the number of households owning firearms is on the decline, but there is a countertrend of those owning guns to own more than one. Personally, I do not dispute the statistic that says that having a firearm in my home increases my risk of a gun-related injury (or death). The same applies for my owning a chainsaw. If I do not own a chainsaw, my risk of a chainsaw accident will perforce be far lower.
So, personally speaking, I'm a safety fanatic with my weapons and handle them with extreme care. But I cannot control my neighbors' behavior and if some of them are foolish or careless, they may suffer a ND (or worse) and might add to the statistics of household injuries. It's logical, then, that physicians take an interest in this area because ultimately they have to clean up the damage caused by irresponsible owners (and criminals) and statistical data can help them formulate health policy.
It could be the case that some of them will advocate for a reduction in the number of firearms to thereby reduce risk. That's a given. But that's not the entire picture. Some will be advocating for increased education, training and other things that may, statistically, lead to better outcomes. Demographic data on ownership can help hospitals and ERs to better plan for the kinds of resources they'll need to provide adequate levels of service. Given their mission, it would be negligent for physicians to ignore the causal factors of firearm injuries.
After all, a lot of people here talk about popping goblins, feeding bullets to bad guys, "ending the threat," etc., but if you do shoot someone who doesn't die as a result (including yourself), you'll be giving a doctor a rough day at the office.
