Time to start canceling those newspaper subscriptions

Status
Not open for further replies.

GingerGuy

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
163
Do not support a newspaper that doesn't support our rights. Here's an article full of bias about DC guns. Newspapers just keep firing at our rights...:cuss:


Doctors worried by Supreme Court gun ruling
Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:44pm EDT
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Last month's Supreme Court ruling striking down a strict gun control law in the U.S. capital will lead to more deaths and accidental injuries, the editors of the New England Journal of Medicine said on Wednesday.

They joined a growing clamor from medical doctors, especially emergency room physicians, who fear a surge of accidental deaths, murders and suicides if handguns become more easily available than they already are.

The ruling struck down a law in Washington that forbade personal ownership of handguns. The court made explicit, for the first time, that Americans had rights as individuals to own guns.

It won praise from President George W. Bush, Republican presidential candidate John McCain and guns rights advocates. But gun control groups expressed concern about new legal attacks on existing gun laws.

Justice Antonin Scalia, who voted with the 5-4 majority on the decision, said citizens may prefer handguns for home defense because they "can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."

The three editors of the prominent medical journal, Dr. Jeffrey Drazen, Stephen Morrissey and Dr. Gregory Curfman, said handguns were far more likely to cause harm than do good.

"In our opinion, there is little reason to expect an optimistic result; research has shown and logic would dictate that fewer restrictions on handguns will result in a substantial increase in injury and death," they wrote in a commentary released in Thursday's issue.

The United States is estimated to have the world's highest civilian gun ownership rate. Gun deaths average 80 a day in the United States, 34 of them murders, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"In 2005, the last year with complete data, there were more than 30,000 deaths and 70,000 nonfatal injuries from firearms," Drazen, a physician at Harvard Medical School, and his colleagues wrote.

"About one quarter of the nonfatal injuries and a tenth of the deaths were in children and adolescents. To place these numbers in perspective, 10 times as many Americans die each year from firearms as have died in the Iraq war during the past five years," they added.

"Firearm injuries represent a major public health problem that seems certain to be exacerbated with less handgun regulation."

Other doctors have agreed.

"A number of scientific studies, published in the world's most rigorous, peer-reviewed journals, show the risks of keeping a loaded gun in the home outweigh the potential benefits," Dr. Arthur Kellerman, an emergency physician at Emory University in Atlanta, wrote in The Washington Post.

"According to the Justice Department, far more guns are lost each year to burglary or theft than are used to defend people or property."

The New England Journal editors noted that the 1976 Washington law affected by the ruling resulted in an immediate 25 percent decline in murders and suicides in the District of Columbia but not in neighboring Virginia and Maryland.

"It is well documented in the medical literature that regulation of guns benefits the public health," they wrote.

"We have a heightened concern about suicide," they added.

Medical experts note it is far easier to carry out a suicide with a gun than it is using any other method.
 
Doctors. Another group that needs to get nocked off of their pedistal. Seems like every time a group is overpaid for their profession (actors, singers, politicians) they immediatly become experts on every subject they've never studied.
 
Time to start canceling those newspaper subscriptions
Do not support a newspaper that doesn't support our rights. Here's an article full of bias about DC guns. Newspapers just keep firing at our rights...
It's just an article reporting what some guys said. It's pretty well written, actually. What do object to in the article?

Which newspaper was it in, by the way?


Justice Antonin Scalia, who voted with the 5-4 majority on the decision, said citizens may prefer handguns for home defense because they "can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."
I love that phrase. What imagery!
I gotta think that Scalia is a handgun owner.
 
Medical experts note it is far easier to carry out a suicide with a gun than it is using any other method.

All together now... DUH!!

This is precisely what makes a gun such a fine tool for self defense.
 
New England Journal of Medicine has long been home to the worst anti-gunners around. Nothing new there. Luckily, no one gives a crap what doctors think about guns. Just like no one gives a crap what gardeners think about helicopters.

Dope
 
I have noticed that in crowded urban areas if the number of motor vehicles is substantially increased the number of accidents is also likely to go up. The solution of course is to pass more restrictive laws to that fewer people can get a driver’s license. With fewer drivers we will all be much safer as we walk to the supermarket, our jobs, a school or restaurant, whatever. :uhoh:

Of course if the price of gas keeps going up, laws may be unnecessary… :neener:
 
You could cancel your subscriptions, but it is not likely to have much of an impact. Newspaper subs are on the decline anyway. Maybe a better strategy would be to send frequent letters to the editor, explaining the importance of gun rights. If they have blogs on their websites, which many now do, go on there and give the pro-gun story.

Just a suggestion.
 
Nothing new there. Luckily, no one gives a crap what doctors think about guns.
That's wishful thinking. LOTS of people care what docs think about guns and health issues. And some are decision-makers.

Just saying that docs (and NEJM) are bad, bad, bad doesn't make it so.

Gun rights advocacy is one thing. Unnecessarily underestimating the opposition is another.

I agree with gretske: write to the media and espouse the pro-gun rights position.
 
Patient: Doc, what's wrong with a gun...I can't get the gun-lock off the safety.

Doctor: How the Hades would I know...I'm a doctor, not a gunsmith!

Newspaper: Doctor, what is your professional opinion about guns and safety?

Doctor: Guns are dangerous. It is impossible to make any gun child-proof, even with a safety.

Patient: I thought you didn't know anything about guns?!

Patient: Mr. Editor, cancel my subscription. Doc, cancel my prescription. I'll be doin' business elsewhere.
 
That is the legislative angle that was started during the Clinton administration I believe. Trying to shift guns to being a health issue.

What newspaper was this? Newpapers do choose what they want to print regardless of the source.
 
Just like no one gives a crap what gardeners think about helicopters.

More akin to what gardners might think about gophers. They see the damage they can create. However, they never ever get to see the up-side.
 
Medical experts note it is far easier to carry out a suicide with a gun than it is using any other method.

It is also far easier to go to the Doc, get a bad diagnosis or bad prescriptions and croak off due to that.

and in New York, if you happen to fall on your face while in a mental ward, you have a decent chance of people ignoring you..... I think the hospital involved hired all of Kitty Genovese's neighbors.
 
1. It'd help if you told us which newspaper printed the story, so we could take appropriate action without having to guess.

2. Oh wait, it's a Reuters story, which means that they got it from a newsfeed service, and it's not the original work of the newspaper in question - therefore making a subscription cancellation pointless.

Sorry for being so blunt, but if people are going to propose boycotts or protests of companies or services based on their percieved views on a subject, they should really try to understand who and what they're dealing with first. Otherwise, we as a group tend to come off as ignorant, reactionary hotheads who can't put two and two together.


Luckily, no one gives a crap what doctors think about guns. Just like no one gives a crap what gardeners think about helicopters.

And...that's gonna be added to my sig line. :)
 
Harvard is a seriously lefty medical school, you have to take anything they publish with a grain of salt. They stay flush with cash by getting alumni into govt jobs, and funneling govt grants to Harvard.
 
fear a surge of accidental deaths, murders and suicides if handguns become more easily available than they already are.
No there will just be a shift. Fewer innocent victims killed and injured, more bad guys.
They quoted Kellerman. Cue the slide whistles and clowns.
 
For what its worth --Newspapers are not the privileged property of the anti-gun Liberals -!!!!
There is NO REASON the PRO gunnies cant buy--start -Co-opt a major newspaper.
The NRA has the know how The GOA supposedly has the will to do something And the Gun owners could use a few good jobs -NOTE=Most major new papers are UNION -And we know where MOST Unions stand on the 2A.
If we started a paper in say Some city that has only 1 liberal paper -Yet that area has a good mixing of gun owners and Conservatives -Chances you could get it off the ground and Actually make some money -I know Id work at a start up Paper for near minimum wage Just to see the thing get going !
 
auto mechanics---excuse me, technicians, work all the time on cars after accidents. does that make them experts on the causes of accidents?
yet the media treats doctors as the go to experts on guns because they treat the gunshot people's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top