Lock and Load

Nothing kills Democratic candidates' prospects more than guns. If it weren't for guns, President-elect Kerry might now be conferring with incoming Senate Majority Leader Daschle.

Since the Brady Bill took effect in 1994, gun-control efforts have been a catastrophe for Democrats. They have accomplished almost nothing nationally, other than giving a big boost to the Republicans. Mr. Kerry tried to get around the problem by blasting away at small animals, but nervous Red Staters still suspected Democrats of plotting to seize guns.

Moreover, it's clear that in this political climate, further efforts at gun control are a nonstarter. You can talk until you're blue in the face about the 30,000 gun deaths each year, about children who are nine times as likely to die in a gun accident in America as elsewhere in the developed world, about the $17,000 average cost (half directly borne by taxpayers) of treating each gun injury. But nationally, gun control is dead.

So it's time for a fundamentally new approach, emblematic of how Democrats must think in new ways about old issues. The new approach is to accept that handguns are part of the American landscape, but to use a public health approach to try to make them much safer.

The model is automobiles, for a high rate of traffic deaths was once thought to be inevitable. But then we figured out ways to mitigate the harm with seat belts, air bags and collapsible steering columns, and since the 1950's the death rate per mile driven has dropped 80 percent.

"You can tell whether a camera is loaded by looking at it, and you should be able to tell whether a gun is loaded by looking at it," said David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Professor Hemenway has written "Private Guns, Public Health," a brilliant and clear-eyed primer for the country.

We take safety steps that reduce the risks of everything from chain saws (so they don't kick back and cut off an arm) to refrigerators (so kids can't lock themselves inside). But firearms have been exempt. Companies make cellphones that survive if dropped, but some handguns can fire if they hit the ground.

Professor Hemenway notes that in the 1990's, two children a year, on average, died after locking themselves in car trunks. This was considered unacceptable, so a government agency studied the problem, and General Motors and Ford engineered safety mechanisms to prevent such deaths.

In contrast, 15 children under the age of 5 die annually in fatal gun accidents in the U.S., along with 18 children 5 to 9 years old. We routinely make aspirin bottles childproof, but not guns, even though childproof pistols were sold back in the 19th century - they wouldn't fire unless the shooter put pressure on the handle as well as the trigger.

Require magazine safeties so a gun cannot be fired when the clip is removed (people can forget that a bullet may still be in the chamber and pull the trigger). Many guns already have magazine safeties, but not all.

Finance research to develop "smart guns," which can be fired only by authorized users. If a cellphone can be locked with a PIN, why not a gun? This innovation would protect children - and thwart criminals.

Start public safety campaigns urging families to keep guns locked up in a gun safe or with a trigger lock (now, 12 to 14 percent of gun owners with young children keep loaded and unlocked weapons in their homes).

Encourage doctors to counsel depressed patients not to keep guns, and to advise new parents on storing firearms safely.

Create a national database for gun deaths. In a traffic fatality, 120 bits of data are collected, like the positions of the passengers and the local speed limit, so we now understand what works well (air bags, no "right on red") and what doesn't (driver safety courses). Statistics on gun violence are much flimsier, so we don't know what policies would work best, and much of the data hurled by rival camps at each other is inaccurate.

Would these steps fly politically? Maybe. One poll showed that 88 percent of the public favors requiring that guns be childproof. And such measures demonstrate the kind of fresh thinking that can keep alive not only thousands of Americans, but the Democratic Party as well.

He's saying the Dems are perceived as having all the wrong answers and can't just SAY things differently or shoot a couple of geese. They have to start changing. I completely disagree with his position and his answers, but this is the one Dem I've read recently who is saying "We have to change or our party will die."

Don't be fooled by his rhetoric. This is more of the same old, same old. Loaded chamber indicators, magazine diconnects, "smart" guns etc,. Those are gun control too, and they have been part of the 'rat platform of incrementalist gun control for years. Just because the FBI told the Branch Davidians "This is not an attack" doesn't mean it wasn't one. Just because some NYT moron claims "this is an entirely new approach, one that isn't gun control at all, and one that the red staters can or will accept" doesn't make it true either.

Encourage doctors to counsel depressed patients not to keep guns

I read the AMA was asking their members to questions patients on gun ownership. What business is it of there's? If my doc evers ask me that he'll have to fill out and sign this:

FIREARMS SAFETY COUNSELING REPRESENTATION: Page 1
PHYSICIAN QUALIFICATIONS AND LIABILITY
Part One: Qualifications

I affirm that I am certified to offer (Name of Patient:), hereinafter referred to as "the Patient", qualified advice about firearms safety in the home, having received:
Specify Course(s) of Study: ______________________________
From: ______________________________________________________
Specify Institution(s) ____________________________________________________________
On: ________________________________________________________
Specify Course Completion Date(s): ______________________________________________________
Resulting in: _________________________________________________
Specify Accreditation(s), Certification(s), License(s) etc.: _____________________________________
Check one, as appropriate:
___ I represent that I have reviewed applicable scientific literature pertaining to defensive gun use and beneficial results of private firearms ownership. I further represent that I have reviewed all other relevant home safety issues with the Patient, including those relating to electricity, drains, disposals, compactors, garage doors, driveway safety, pool safety, pool fence codes and special locks for pool gates, auto safety, gas, broken glass, stored cleaning chemicals, buckets, toilets, sharp objects, garden tools, home tools, power tools, lawnmowers, lawn chemicals, scissors, needles, forks, knives, etc. I also acknowledge, by receiving this document, I have been made aware that, in his inaugural address before the American Medical Association on June 20, 2001, new president Richard Corlin, MD, admitted "What we don't know about violence and guns is literally killing us...researchers do not have the data to tell how kids get guns, if trigger locks work, what the warning signs of violence in schools and at the workplace are and other critical questions due to lack of research funding." (UPI). In spite of this admission, I represent that I have sufficient data and expertise to provide expert and clinically sound advice to patients regarding firearms in the home.

OR
___ I am knowingly engaging in Home/Firearms Safety Counseling without certification, license or formal training in Risk Management, and; I have not reviewed applicable scientific literature pertaining to defensive gun use and beneficial results of private firearms ownership.

Part Two: Liability
I have determined, from a review of my medical malpractice insurance, that if I engage in an activity for which I am not certified, such as Firearms Safety Counseling, the carrier (check one, as appropriate):
___ Will
___ Will not
Cover lawsuits resulting from neglect, lack of qualification, etc.
Insurance Carrier name, address and policy number insuring me for firearms safety expertise: ____________________________________________________________

I further warrant that, should the Patient follow my firearm safety counseling and remove from the home and/or disable firearms with trigger locks or other mechanisms, and if the patient or a family member, friend or visitor is subsequently injured or killed as a result of said removal or disabling, that my malpractice insurance and/or personal assets will cover all actual and punitive damages resulting from a lawsuit initiated by the patient, the patient's legal representative, or the patient's survivors.

Signature of attesting physician and date: ___________________________________________________

I hope the nee AG gets very aggressive in restoring 2nd amendment rights for every person in the union. I noticed he is from TX. I hope that is a good sign.

Forget it. With (I think) the exception of Dubya's born-again religiosity, I think everyone in Manor Bush is a deep-down Connecticut Yankee, Yankee-bred and Yankee-raised. Bush may have been born in, and even educated in, Texas -- but he's a member of the Upper Class, and so he thinks like a clubbed-up, New England topsider.

Believe me, the Bushes' set (social and political) do NOT see the Second Amendment the way you do.

The Pew Centers' political typology survey showed that business RiNO's like the Bush family do not favor or support wide ownership of firearms, and are inclined privately to support strong licensing laws and other controls, official and unofficial*. To them, we're just "them". Employees. Hired hands. Not real people.

*For example, California and New York both have licensing laws. In practice, the discretion LEO's have in granting licenses means that you don't get a carry license -- but Ed Koch and Sylvester Stallone and other politicians and celebrities do.

The most succinct way to say it is that liberals and RiNO's tend to agree, that there is a very discernible trash line in society (somewhere just below their feet), and that only substantial, responsible people (like them) ought to have access to firearms. People like you, on the other hand, need not to have access.

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.