Thursday, June 21, 2018
Editorials

Editorial: Free speech wins in docs vs. glocks

For sound medical reasons, doctors commonly ask patients about safety issues: gates around swimming pools, locks on cabinets containing poisons, and yes, guns in the home. A 2011 state law twisted those commonsense precautions into a fabricated assault on the Second Amendment and restricted doctors from asking patients about firearm ownership. This week, a federal appeals court identified the real infringement — limiting the free speech rights of doctors — and struck down key provisions of this unnecessary law.

The Firearm Owners' Privacy Act, nicknamed "Docs vs. Glocks," was prompted by a handful of complaints from gun owners whose doctors had asked questions the patients perceived as harassing. One Ocala mother said a doctor refused to treat her child after she refused to answer. Nothing requires patients to answer any questions from a doctor, and the law already provides protection for people whose doctors sever their relationship. But with aggressive backing from the National Rifle Association, the Legislature overreacted and created disciplinary and financial penalties for doctors who ask patients about gun ownership beyond what is "relevant" to medical care or safety. The statute also sought to prevent doctors from putting information about gun ownership in medical records, and from discriminating against patients or "harassing" them for owning firearms.

"The first problem," the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in its 8-3 decision, "is that there was no evidence whatsoever ... that any doctors or medical professionals have taken away patients' firearms or otherwise infringed on patients' Second Amendment rights." Of course there wasn't. Doctors have no authority to take anyone's gun away. Just asking about guns in a home — which follows guidance from the American Medical Association about assessing safety risks — is not an infringement of the right to bear arms. In other words, the court wrote, there's "no actual conflict" between the First Amendment free speech rights of doctors and the Second Amendment gun rights of patients.

Don't tell that to Marion Hammer, the longtime NRA lobbyist in Tallahassee. She accused the court of using the First Amendment "as a sword to terrorize the Second Amendment" and declaring that it "completely disregards the rights and the will of the elected representatives of the people of Florida." That would be the elected representatives who long ago made it a crime to fail to secure firearms that could be accessed by minors. The elected representatives who inscribed in Florida law that a "tragically large number of Florida children have been accidentally killed or seriously injured by negligently stored firearms; that placing firearms within the reach or easy access of children is irresponsible, encourages such accidents, and should be prohibited; and that legislative action is necessary to protect the safety of our children."

The Firearm Owners' Privacy Act risks the safety of children by preventing doctors from making routine inquiry of parents about whether their handguns are properly stored and locked. That's sensible preventive medicine, not a gun grab, and the federal appeals court saw right through it.

Comments
Editorial: Congress should ban splitting kids, parents

Editorial: Congress should ban splitting kids, parents

The shocking scenes of immigrant children crying after being taken from their parents at the border exposed a new level of cruelty by the Trump administration, and though the president reversed course Wednesday, Congress needs to end the shameful pra...
Updated: 3 hours ago
Editorial: A court victory for protecting Florida’s environment

Editorial: A court victory for protecting Florida’s environment

A Tallahassee judge has affirmed the overwhelming intent of Florida voters by ruling that state lawmakers have failed to comply with a constitutional amendment that is supposed to provide a specific pot of money to buy and preserve endangered lands. ...
Published: 06/18/18
Updated: 06/20/18
Editorial: Trump should stop taking children away from parents at the border

Editorial: Trump should stop taking children away from parents at the border

Innocent children should not be used as political pawns. That is exactly what the Trump administration is doing by cruelly prying young children away from their parents as these desperate families cross the Mexican border in search of a safer, better...
Published: 06/17/18
Updated: 06/19/18

Editorial: ATF should get tougher on gun dealers who violate the law

Gun dealers who break the law by turning a blind eye to federal licensing rules are as dangerous to society as people who have no right to a possess a firearm in the first place. Yet a recent report shows that the federal agency responsible for polic...
Published: 06/17/18
Updated: 06/18/18
Editorial: Encouraging private citizens to step up on transit

Editorial: Encouraging private citizens to step up on transit

The new grass-roots effort to put a transportation package before Hillsborough County voters in November faces a tough slog. Voters rejected a similar effort in 2010, and another in 2016 by elected officials never made it from the gate. But the lates...
Published: 06/15/18
Editorial: 40 years later, honoring remarkable legacy of Nelson Poynter

Editorial: 40 years later, honoring remarkable legacy of Nelson Poynter

Forty years ago today, Nelson Poynter died. He was the last individual to own this newspaper, and to keep the Times connected to this community, he did something remarkable. He gave it away.In his last years, Mr. Poynter recognized that sooner or lat...
Published: 06/15/18

There was no FBI anti-Trump conspiracy

The Justice Department released Thursday the highly anticipated report on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email probe and other sensitive issues in the 2016 election. It is not the report President Donald Trump wanted. But there is enough i...
Published: 06/14/18
Updated: 06/15/18

Voter purge may be legal, but it’s also suppression

The Supreme Court’s ruling last Monday to allow Ohio’s purging of its voter rolls is difficult to dispute legally. While federal law prohibits removing citizens from voter rolls simply because they haven’t voted, Ohio’s purge is slightly different. T...
Published: 06/14/18
Updated: 06/15/18

Editorial: Free rides will serve as a test of whether the streetcar is serious transportation

Who wouldn’t jump at the chance to ride for free?This fall, the TECO Streetcar Line eliminates its $2.50-a-ride-fare, providing the best opportunity yet to see whether the system’s vintage streetcar replicas can serve as a legitimate transportation a...
Published: 06/14/18
Updated: 06/15/18

AT&T and the case for digital innovation

A good way to guarantee you’ll be wrong about something is to predict the future of technology. As in, "One day, we’ll all …" Experts can hazard guesses about artificial intelligence, driverless cars or the death of cable television, but technologica...
Published: 06/14/18