Man, hope this works before too long . . .

Yay! I was just closing the wonky bold. It worked.

See if they run background checks and register you at flea markets buying new guns. You're right about new guns, but then that isn't registering with the community. Some cities say that all guns must licensed locally, too, I think. Never wanted to live anywhere like that, never will.

Not sure on the second half of your question. But the first part???? Around here you can't sell firearms in a "flea market" (PA). Same in CA. You can buy them at a "gun show" and yes they must preform the NICS check for all sales. Even if it's just a reciever (since that's where the serial number is). I've got a firearm I can't sell OR give to anyone. I bought an 80% blank 45ACP (means 80% of the machine work was done). Being such it has NO serial number. legal to own as a custom-made pistol, But that's it. Like It's federal law. The gray area comes in when you sell privately to someone. In that case the NICS goes out the door for long rifles and shotguns. Now private "pistol" sales still need a NICS to be legal

Sorry, I really wasn't trying to be dense, I just didn't realize that Texas went so far as to outlaw gay marriage (as oppose to simply not making gay marriage legal). Make sense now.

My bad. You're a little more politically savvy than most, so I wrongly assumed you were up on our ridiculous legislation.

Flea markets are private transactions between individuals. Unless your particular state or locale has a regulation, there's no federal law against long gun sales between people. You should be able to buy and sell guns a flea markets.

As for pistols, heh, have you ever tried to do a NICS for a private handgun sale? Most police departments REFUSE to handle private handgun transfers. Period. I've never seen one that would. Your only choice is to go through a FFL dealer. How many people do you think really do that?

Granted, it is breaking the law, but if you believe the coathanger abortionist crowd, some laws were meant to be broken, right? I don't own a pistol myself. I prefer pump shotguns with #1. #00 is overrated.

As for pistols, heh, have you ever tried to do a NICS for a private handgun sale? Most police departments REFUSE to handle private handgun transfers. Period. I've never seen one that would. Your only choice is to go through a FFL dealer. How many people do you think really do that?

You don't go to the police dept. "Every" NICS I've ever seen run was done at a gun store. The NICS absolutely requires a dedicated computer running specialized software. Most police departments won't pony up that kind of money. I've done quite a few private transfers myself (worked in 3 different gun stores).

But you're right about one thing. The sound of the slide racking on a 12ga pump is enough to freeze anyones blood.

I wasn't, but I'm definitely going to look into it. Thanks for the info.

"In 2004 there were 105 kids under 18 died in accidental gun shootings. In that same year 55 died of adverse medical reactions. If 105 deaths is enough to make our medical professionals spy on our private homes, then those same professionals should be held to the same scrutiny for the danger they pose to our kids."

Just like in Iraq when 3000 soldiers die but 25,000 are maimed by injuries that aren't lethal, how many of the kids who get injured because of guns do not die as a result of those injuries and skilled medical professionals? Bring us a statistic for that because I say that numbeir is higher. As for spying, wouldn't a spy, be definition have to report their findings to someone i.e. law enforcement or someone else. If a kid is being threatened with gun violence by their parents then yes it would be a doctors duty to report that. It would also be the doctors duty to determine and inform patients on the risks of risky behavior. Whether that is conversations between the child/doctor, child/parent/doctor conversations, or parent/doctor.

"it is not a stretch to envision a militant anti-gun doctor lidging allegations of abuse/neglect against a parent whose child reported them for gun ownership."

Ok, lots of things strange here Gid. First how is is that anybody could be militant yet also anti-gun? I'm not sure I understand that to not be mutually exclusive. I believe it is a stretch to envision anyone who is a medical professional reporting abuse/neglect merely for "gun ownership".

Gun ownership is not a crime.

Suicidal adults consuming alcohol and playing Russian Roulette is a dangerous behavior, Playing with guns is a dangerous behavior. Children + loaded unlocked guns in a house = dangerous behavior. See above stat posted by someone else to see that it is not only plausible but common enough that statistics are kept on the figure. What inspires kids to do this, in my country Cops/Robbers, toy guns, media exposure, G.I. Joe, Power Rangers, School shootings, all sorts of influences on children, and then as kids mature teenagers begin to develop the "indestructible mentality"

"The truth is, we HAVE become everything we hated about Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia in too many ways. In George Bush's America, it is not inconceivable that a dissident could be whisked away in the middle of the night (Gitmo, anyone? All we have to do is label them a "terrorist, and bingo! Civil rights go *poof*!), and the government goes on TV BEGGING citizens to turn in their neighbours for even the suspicion of wrongdoing (most notably in the areas of CPS/Domestic "terrorism")."

That's an opinion, I think we also hated the slaughter or Jews, and pseudo science telling some in society that they are the master race, we haven't gotten to that point by a long stretch. Take a deep breath, stay on topic, i.e. asking about guns in the Dr. Office, lay off the cable news networks a bit, you are going psycho on us here Gid. Nobody is calling anybody a terrorist, nobody is taking away your civil rights in the DR's office.

"There is no Amercan more pathetic than those who use their freedoms to rob others of theirs!!!"

Would you be saying I'm a pathetic American, because I'm using my freedom of speech to support doctors asking kids some questions about risky behaviors that they might not be comfortable asking in the presence of their parents. If that's what you were/are saying, then thats fine I'm comfortable with your opinion. If that's not what you are saying, please clarify because I don't get it.

Who's being robbed of what?

"it is only yelling when you type in all caps. Typing key words in caps is emphasizing them."

Yelling, how can anyone truly yell in words that are written. Unless they finish each statement with, "yelled he". The yelling part is as much in your head as the letters are to form words. That writing in capital letters should offend some people, because lowercase is the accepted etiquette, is silly.

"You might want to watch your mouth, DannyBoi. Or would you prefer to follow jennifer's disappearing act?"

Did I say something untrue? Were you not trolling? Are you not a censor? I'll watch my mouth if you watch yours, a skill you have yet to demonstrate comprehension of. I'm not sure why you think it is fair or reasonable to launch personal attacks and expect me not to respond in kind, Or to inform others of your ways, which clearly you see nothing wrong with or you'd make an effort to change.

I have never asked you to not have an opinion only to own up to it, and not claim it isn't what it is. Racist, censor, hippocratic, un-Democratic, un-American, or trolling WhippyGirl.

I have yet to see anyone dispute that teenagers do dangerous things and participate in risky behavior. While it may be that some teenagers have a relationship with their parents that would permit them to give the exact same answers to questions in front of their parents, or in confidence with their medical professional, it is equally plausible that many teenagers do not have that relationship, trust, understand, and freedom from fear or retribution. In fact it is more then likely because of those "at the risk" that the questions are asked in confidence.

Maybe the real problem is not understanding the value of sacrificing some of your privacy for the safety and well being of your children and children in general. If you don't want them asking about guns, maybe you don't want them asking about sex, or drugs, or glue sniffing habit, or asking about a very obscure habit of lighting matches. Those are invasions of privacy as well and if the intentions of doctors is suspect in those cases explain the difference to me as to when its ok for doctors to ever ask a question that might invade your privacy?

While you are in a doctors office you aren't a teenager you are a patient and medical professionals under the Hippocratic oath are sworn to provide the same standard of care regardless of their patient's circumstance. Whether that makes you uncomfortable or not.

It may also be true that most parents are responsible, yet clearly it is also the case that some parents are not, and a doctors legal and ethical responsibility is to the patient not to the parents of a patient.

There are plenty of times when doctors are just trying to do their job the best they know how and have to put up defenses against litigation, alleged malpractice for example. I really don't think they have any interest in getting farther into the legal system by exposing themselves to further areas of legal attack, if the benefits of asking simple questions to their patients were not clear.

I could be wrong.

Umm, I've met a few people who were militant and antigun, Dan. They use the GOVERNMENT'S guns, rather than their own, to enforce their militancy.



Well, then why don't they ask if the patient has dogs in the home and warn them of the dangers of dog bites? Why don't they ask if the patient has a can opener and warn them of the danger of cutting themselves on can edges? The simple truth is, Dan, there is a CLEAR agenda behind these questions.

Asking about guns in the home is beyond a doctor's responsibility. If he wants to send ALL children home with pamphlets about gun safety, that's cool with me, actually. But the truth is, what is reported to the doctor is NEVER confidential as far as the government is concerned, and his prying actually is a de facto illegal search when it is done on behalf of the government.

Should the doctor ask a kid how many speeding tickets your parents get a year? How many kids die in car accidents?



OMG, lol, you didn't just equate gun ownership with "violence", did you? Yep, it looks like you did...



I would have sworn you just said that a doctor asking a child if their parents own guns is akin to the doctor asking if a child is threatened with gun violence. I would assume gun violence and child endangerment are crimes.

"Umm, I've met a few people who were militant and antigun, Dan. They use the GOVERNMENT'S guns, rather than their own, to enforce their militancy."

Is it a crime to own a gun? If the crime is you don't have your gun registered in your house then that's on you. Just because you have a gun in your house doesn't mean you have committed a crime, law enforcement won't bother themselves with you unless they can establish "elements of a crime"

Explain you haven't crossed over the edge into psychodom in connecting a situation where a doctor is asking a medical question, with answer kept in medical confidence unless the risk is great enough to the patient or society that they have to report it, and that that leads to what? An arrest? A confiscation of your illicit firearm?

Enforcement of militancy is bologne.

"Well, then why don't they ask if the patient has dogs in the home and warn them of the dangers of dog bites? Why don't they ask if the patient has a can opener and warn them of the danger of cutting themselves on can edges? The simple truth is, Dan, there is a CLEAR agenda behind these questions."

That's a propaganda message and your opinion. If you'd like doctors to ask questions about every potential risk then they'd have office appointments that last days instead of an hour or less. I guess if dogs bites were often as lethal as gunshot wounds and morbidity rates can openers then they might be asking about those. Nobody uses a can opener to commit a suicide or kill an entire family in a murder suicide.

Take for example, the 13 year old used in the initial discussion, teenagers and young adults going through puberty often have bouts of depression and difficulty fitting in and thoughts of suicide are a common enough tragedy because of how society and media attempts to exploit young adults. Unlocked guns, could be used in a suicide attempt, they are easy enough to load and easy enough to fire, easy enough to accidentally misfire as, if you don't know what you are doing as well. A doctor knowing a patients mental state, if suicidal or vulnerable, might check with parents that guns are locked up or suggest storing them someplace in accessible to minors.

Is the question "Do you have guns in the house" in the doctors office legitimate to you yet? Will it ever be?

"But the truth is, what is reported to the doctor is NEVER confidential as far as the government is concerned, and his prying actually is a de facto illegal search when it is done on behalf of the government."

Maybe in your country and also in your opinion. The government in the United States say you may keep and bear arms but they have plenty of other rights, like knowing you have them. During a traffic stop they ask if you have any on you and you are expected to report them as soon as you are in proximity with police so they are aware.

"OMG, lol, you didn't just equate gun ownership with "violence", did you? Yep, it looks like you did..."

I said If. Do you need to twist my words to hear your own version of what I said. Re-read it and relax nobody is coming at 2 am to take your guns away.

"I would have sworn you just said that a doctor asking a child if their parents own guns is akin to the doctor asking if a child is threatened with gun violence. I would assume gun violence and child endangerment are crimes."

I would assume they are as well. Do you think parents threatening gun violence and endangering their children ought to be able to maintain their right to bear arms? Why?

So... if a doctor knows a kid is threatened with gun violence... he should ask if the parents own guns. Odd sort of logic, there. One would assume once he knows a child is threatened with gun violence the question would be redundant.

If he doesn't, then he's fishing. In that light, why not teachers? Why not just have the government come in and inspect. Do we investigate crimes when there is no evidence of a crime?

How about doctors just go ahead and question kids to see if the parents molest them? The parents own genitals, I assume.



Whether a parent has a gun is NOT a medical question. Period. There's something like 200 million guns in private hands in America. If gun ownership was an indicator of a medical threat then car ownership would be a thousand times more dubious.

Again, you're assuming that simply knowing there are guns in the house somehow enables the doctor to know that there is a threat.



Do you think doctors are agents of law enforcement? Do you think doctors have the skills necessary to investigate crimes before there is any evidence of a crime? Has this kid been pistol whipped, or shot before he comes in?

Why do you keep coming back to gun violence? Are you trying to say that all people who own guns are suspect? Why would gun ownership imply gun violence to you? Does baseball bat ownership imply beatings?

Like I said, asking a child how many tickets their parents get would be far more warranted. Asking a kid how the parents store pharmaceuticals would make more sense. I knew a kid who killed himself in jr. high. He hung himself. Maybe we should ask whether the parents irresponsibly store their rope.

If a child appears to be a suicide danger all it would take is to say IF there are guns in the house they should be removed. That takes a known threat, and offers a solution. You evidently want to smoke out the threats. Odd sort of attitude from you, would you agree with investigating, say, terrorism before there is evidence of it?

"Hey, there little guy, I see you are from Yeman. Do your parents have a bomb factory in the basement? If so, you could be threatened from accidental explosions." Or how about drug use. Why not ask kids if their parents make meth in the kitchen?

You ever hear of anonymous reporting, Dan? Doctors can and DO violate doctor patient confidentiality EVERY DAY simply because they don't like the parents or something the parents do by calling CPS.

Since you've resorted to ad hominem attacks, dan (and ad hominem attacks with bad grammar, nonetheless), it's apparent you're running out of arguments.

Here's the deal, Dan. It's actually illegal for social workers to interview children without their parents' consent (although most parents don't know it and don't protest when their rights are violated), so now they're using doctors to do it. Do you not understand that a doctor is now legally REQUIRED to notify CPS if they even SUSPECT abuse or neglect? This means if this is a routine series of questions and the doctor feels that owning guns constitutes abuse or neglect, he HAS to inform CPS.

I realize the Constitution doesn't matter to people like you unless we're protecting baby rapers, baby killers or homosexuals, Dan, but guess what? You don't get to override it singlehandedly. Ironic that questioning an Islamic terrorist in Gitmo is a violation of Constitutional rights, but grilling a child without a lawyer present is simply in the best interests of the child.

You disgust me, honestly.