Posted on 07/16/2008 8:48:25 PM PDT by BobbyT
"Is gun regulation a public health issue?"
http://broadcaster.medpagetoday.com/t?r=2&c=1898&l=15&ctl=CA06:5D21AFF7DD791D1C59086A13CA638538
Welcome to FR
http://broadcaster.medpagetoday.com/t?r=2&c=1898&l=15&ctl=CA06:5D21AFF7DD791D1C59086A13CA638538
Sure. It leads to lead poisoning.
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
Lack of a gun can be bad for your health.
Yeah, the bullets contain toxic lead, and the guns themselves may contain traces of otehr dangerous metals. [/s]
No.
.
Yeah. Regulate them too much, and only the crooks have them. Then the law-abiding get shot.
Welcome to FR
Just voted
No 67%
Yes 33%
“Is gun regulation a public health issue?”
That’s a two sided question.
Bump!
Welcome to FR!
Guns are not a health issue. But crime is certainly a public health issue. Criminal enterprise is more far reaching into public health and welfare than any legal firearm could ever impact.
I was asked the question of whether or not I own guns in a recent health assessment I took. That was the first time I had been asked this question and it set me off! This kind of “nanny-ism” is just creeping everywhere now. How do we stop it?
JoMa
Overwhelmingly “no”
How did you answer if you don’t mind me asking?
It sort of depends on perspective. To an ER crew a gangbanger bleeding on a gurney from being shot while attempting to rape and assault somebody is a patient. The detachment is professionally necessary. To me he’s a target.
Thanks for the warm welcome guys...been an off-and-on reader for a while, and I now find myself in Chicagoland, so I figured it’s about time I start contributing to the fight against 2A bans.
Hope it’s all right if I plug illinoiscarry.com.
It was multiple choice with Yes, No, Prefer not to say as options. I choose “prefer not to say”.
JoMa
That’s a two sided question.
Exactly. It's deceiving. I did not respond.
It’s only deceiving in the sense that the facts say anti-2A laws disarm the populace against criminals.
But the obvious purpose of this poll is to drum up more tired “blood in the streets”, “think of the children!” emotions. Hence I voted “No”.
I don't answer, rather I simple say “please explain how that question pertains to my (ingrown toenail, heart condition, etc) and appropriate treatment?
The screening nurse usually says, “I have no idea” it's on the form...”
I respond that “I will ignore the question that do not pertain to my health care issue”.
The have gotten used to me and no longer ask if I “feel safe at home, if I am depressed, or if I use illegal drugs etc”. I do answer that I do not smoke or drink, because I don't and they are known contributing factors to poor health.
Do answer nanny-statist BS, they cannot decline treatment and if they do, I know this tort lawyer who is building a multimillion dollar home and could use some work....
God Bless!
bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.