Comments on: Federal Judge Denies NRA Intervention In Doctor Gun Question Law

By: Bob Hudson

Bob Hudson — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:05:15 +0000

Nope never did, fail one I mean.It was a comparsion. But it seems that here are those who do not observe and pay attention to what is going on around them. Now having read articles from doctors who advocate gun- control (remember fair and balanced, it is called ,research ) It really depends on what state they are in, the more anti-gun the state and its rules, the higher this feeling is. It has the potential for abuse.Just another nanny state law. But those who have , and are not currently not keeping up with the movement in this country in enact gun control, are sadly sticking their heads in the sand.How can you confuse the (invasion of privacy) with the( right of privacy) ?Don’t worry , there are those of us who have your back , and are really protecting, you. You just do not see it yet.Well some one has to watch over the sheep.

By: eab

eab — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:13:38 +0000

Bob Hudson said…”and they will find away to use this information, to further their agenda, just like drug testing, at first it was use to promote job safety, then some employers found out if they could drug test you, just before they decide to lay you off, and you pop positive , then they do not have to pay you W.C.”

I said…Gosh,Bob. Sounds to me like you are blaming the doctors for something your employer thought up. Fail a drug test,did you?

I can’t believe the number of people posting (or maybe,like jimmy carter, they are just posting a lot to make their voices seem louder.. Where’s Billy when we need him?) who claim to be in favor of freedom on any other day but want to make an exception in the case of doctors, who should be able to ask any question they want. What are you guys, communists?

By: Bob Hudson

Bob Hudson — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:30:46 +0000

It is though , a sad fact that there are Doctors, with a anti-gun agenda, and they will find away to use this information, to further their agenda, just like drug testing, at first it was use to promote job safety, then some employers found out if they could drug test you, just before they decide to lay you off, and you pop positive , then they do not have to pay you W.C. And those of you who have worked construction , know exactly what I mean, I mean its pretty bad, when , we use to joke about, when they did drug test, we knew that a large lay off was going to happen. And we were always right. If a doctor, has a concern, then talk to next of kin, or parent, But this has the potential , of good intentions, going very very wrong. So no , they do not need to ask.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 03:39:21 +0000

REGARDING:
“You knowledge base of the pertinent concepts of rights is really lacking.”

Ah, well, at least I’m no longer plotting in a conspiracy with the totalitarian pediatricians to take over the world. I guess that’s an improvement of sorts.

David moving up from conspirator to just ignorant

By: jimmy carter

jimmy carter — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 23:44:46 +0000

Sorry David,

You make very little sense. You knowledge base of the pertinent concepts of rights is really lacking. I am tired of having a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

By: jimmy carter

jimmy carter — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 23:15:45 +0000

David,
You just don’t get it. Many of our rights are born from the Amendments. My right to free speech is that I can put your face on a poster and claim you are a wanted child molester. Is it right? Is it legal? No. But I can do it, and will rightfully pay the penalty for it. If one right infringes on another than it is wrong in a civil and many times a legal manner. And yes it is illegal to makes lists of gun owners or concealed weapons permit owners and put them into a data base that can be accessed by public or private entities. It is considered an infringement on second amendment rights by federal law. You obviously know nothing of the laws regarding record keeping and gun purchasing. How am I tying the hands of doctors or future doctors? Makes absolutely no sense. I am talking about circumventing discrimination and infringement of my rights. How does that stop doctors from doing their job? The government has always balanced the power between rights. Where have you been living? What do you think our burgeoning army of judges and lawyers do, right up to the highest levels of government? The doctors waging this lawsuit are primarily pediatricians. The AMA agreed to the verbiage of the law as written. Those filing suit are clearly anti-gun and have advocated for years that all guns should be banned and removed from any household with children up to 18. They are using the same law firm that the Brady Campaign uses. The people who would gladly have the government take your guns by force. Wake up David, you really are at a loss for the reality’s of this situation.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:00:06 +0000

REGARDING:
“To state that you can just find another doctor is very flippant. It is not that easy.”

Once in a blue moon, I’m flippant — especially when someone thinks rights should be thrown away to make things easier for those denying those rights. So your real goal is to make it easy to find a doctor who will treat you? And you will do this by tying the hands of the people who decide to be come doctors? Makes perfect sense.

“You can not just push one amendment down peoples throats without regard to violating the others. Liberty is using/balancing all the rights we are afforded as Americans so the greatest amount of people will benefit from them”

Again, if the government has the power to balance one right against some other, then the government has the power to decide what rights we have. If they can decide, then they aren’t rights, they are indulgences — provisional luxuries.

Trust me (or distrust me, the result‘s the same), you do not want that to happen. Governments change and people unfavorable to your favored rights come into power. If you give them that power, they will take them away.

David for all rights,
not just the ones you and I like

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 19:50:01 +0000

REGARDING:
“As usual David you only read what you want to.

Actually, I DO only read what I want to read. Nonetheless, I usually read all of what I comment on even if I don’t comment on everything they write. Sometimes I agree with all but what I comment on, sometimes I figure somebody else addressed any objections better than I could, sometimes I just don’t care and if I commented on everything written, I would be a bit wordy.

We wouldn’t want that would we?

“It is not exercising liberty to infringe on amendments under the guise of exercising other amendments.”

You keep confusing rights with amendments, but I haven’t said anything about the confusion yet.

“This law was never illegal. It does not stop the use of the first amendment, it provides penalties for using it to discriminate against a certain group of people and their personal beliefs. It provides penalties for production of lists and data bases of gun owners that is already illegal by federal law since that could is considered an infringement of the second amendment.”

You think it’s illegal for you to make a list if that list includes the people who’ve told you they own a weapon?

“To state that you can just find another doctor is very flippant. It is not that easy.”

So your real goal is to make it easy to find a doctor who will treat you? And you will do this by tying the hands of the people who decide to be come doctors? Makes perfect sense.

David for freedom and reason

By: jimmy carter

jimmy carter — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:51:36 +0000

As usual David you only read what you want to. The first 8 sentences of my post. It is not exercising liberty to infringe on amendments under the guise of exercising other amendments. It is illegal. This law was never illegal. It does not stop the use of the first amendment, it provides penalties for using it to discriminate against a certain group of people and their personal beliefs. It provides penalties for production of lists and data bases of gun owners that is already illegal by federal law since that could is considered an infringement of the second amendment. To state that you can just find another doctor is very flippant. It is not that easy. Doctors talk, share records, and this group definitely has an agenda to follow. They will and have discriminated against what they consider as undesirable patients due to their personal beliefs of gun ownership. What about their liberties? You can not just push one amendment down peoples throats without regard to violating the others. Liberty is using/balancing all the rights we are afforded as Americans so the greatest amount of people will benefit from them. There are already a great number of things that can not be asked by employers, bankers, businesses, etc. in order to deter discrimination against individuals. You are not aware of the tenants of liberty nor speak with wisdom.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:41:32 +0000

REGARDING:
” You are anti-gun but not brave enough to state it. ”

Nope, I think guns are wonderful tools. Neither good or bad, but simply to be used or not used as the user decides. I believe everybody on earth should be given a 12 gauge shotgun at age 18, along with a case of shells. (This would end most tyrannies.) They can buy whatever else they desire as long as they don’t commit felonies with them. I believe children should be taught to shoot and handle guns and shown the results of mishandling them.

I also believe people who disagree with me, such as yourself, should be free to say so. I believe doctors should be free to treat whomever they wish, ask whatever they wish. I believe people should be free to not go to doctors they dislike. I believe the government should assume ALL citizens are armed and that people who are afraid the government will find out that they ARE armed are paranoid. I believe only fools turn in their weapons to the government and that fools SHOULD turn in their weapons since fools shouldn’t be handling such things.

Even though I state what I believe, I don’t see where you conclude: ” You fly in the face of liberty, you have no clue what liberty means. You would use “liberty” to form a society to conform to your personal agenda.”

Where have I tried to force anyone to go along with me? What is YOUR definition of liberty which I violate?

David for liberty and honesty