|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
FL: Preposterous' Ruling Gives Gun Rights Groups Early Christmas Gift
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A federal appeals court’s reasoning that a state’s “compelling interest” in protecting its citizens’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms outweighs the First Amendment rights of physicians seeking to inquire about their patients’ firearm ownership is “preposterous,” attorney Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, of Ropes & Gray in Washington, told me in reaction to the latest opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in a closely watched case known popularly as “Docs v. Glocks." |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/19/2015)
|
Ridiculous.
The issue is that physicians who ask these questions are philosophically anti-gun, and exact penalties on those patients who admit gun ownership, such as terminating service, or cataloging gun owners who have been their patients via their personal medical records, which are then available to the federal government.
This is NOT a First Amendment issue; it is a civil rights discrimination issue. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
