AMA’s Anti-Gun Proposals Put Political Agenda Over Science

Gunquacks stick their beaks where they don’t belong and give patients superstition-based “prescriptions” that have no more demonstrable curative properties than bloodletting. [Copper engraving of Doctor Schnabel [i.e Dr. Beak], a plague doctor in seventeenth-century Rome]
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “AMA pushes ‘unprecedented' gun control agenda as congress dithers,” a talking-point parroting opinion piece in Forbes acclaims. “The AMA’s policy-making House of Delegates will consider nearly a dozen proposals on gun control and public safety.”

Left unstated is how they have determined that their proposals will enhance public safety, rather than make things more dangerous. When dealing with the American Medical Association’s positions on guns, it’s not like you can trust what you’re getting is knowledge as opposed to political agenda advancement.

“Action at the AMA meeting, which runs June 9-13 in Chicago, will put the group’s considerable lobbying clout behind legislation heading into November’s mid-term elections when gun control measures are expected to be key issues,” the press release masquerading as journalism admits.

So yeah, we’re talking pure politics.

And what is it they will be strong-arming their delegates to demand?

  • Banning the sale of bump stocks —  because they can function just like dangerous shoelaces.
  • Ending private sales – like they do in Maryland.
  • Turning many active duty servicemen, decorated veterans and members of the Constitutional militia into prohibited persons.

Who do these people think they are? Dick’s Sporting GoodsFuddwriters?

AMA meddling to undermine a fundamental right is nothing short of malpractice.

If your car was acting up, would you consult your doctor and follow his advice? Just because they have an “MD” after their names doesn’t mean they’re qualified to dispense advice on matters outside specialties for which they’ve been certified. That's a point you can prove to yourself if one ever presumes to advise you on “gun safety.” Just present him or her with this form.

So much for “First do no harm.”

There’s a reason why it’s appropriate to call such agenda-driven meddlers “gunquacks.”

Fortunately, the medical profession also includes healers who understand the personal and societal value of an armed citizenry. If you’re not familiar with Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, check out their website for everything from position papers supporting the right to keep and bear arms to networking to “connect patients with gun-friendly providers.”

Then, if you ever run across a well-meaning but misinformed physician, give him a referral and tell him they’ve got a prescription that will cure him.


About David Codrea:David Codrea

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

  • 10 thoughts on “AMA’s Anti-Gun Proposals Put Political Agenda Over Science

    1. What do you call a physician that finishes last in his class at medical school?
      <
      <
      <
      DOCTOR

      Is there any question in your mind why doctors practice and why we are patient?
      They should become perfect in their vocation before they try to play cop.

    2. Physicians of all types are leading us into a new dark age of finacial blood letting by over medication for financial gain. With the exception of trauma treatment they are little more than drug pushers.

    3. The only thing the AMA is interested in is MONEY. They don’t teach how to cure disease, just how to $ell a drug to ma$k the di$ea$e. The medical “profession” has become the biggest drug cartel in the world.
      As to ethics, they spend the same amount of time on it as politicians do – Zilch, Nada, Bupkiss, None at all !!
      As to practicing doctors, there are those with ethics, but they are afraid of the gestapo taking their licenses away because they don’t tow the company line – ie: sell drugs.

    4. I don’t know why medical professionals could be expected to possess any sort of insight on gun regulation. I understand they might have a unique perspective on the sort of injuries inflicted, but that in no way informs any decisions relevant to policy making. It certainly doesn’t qualify them to make statistical assessments without the benefit of any sort of statistical analysis, or relevant research findings. It’s wise to acknowledge that while many doctors are scientists, the vast majority are “caregivers”, or a professional that merely utilizes the discoveries, and advancements made possible by the much smaller group of doctors that can legitimately be called scientists. It’s like the difference between a mechanic/designer, and a “professional parts changer”. They’re not quite the same thing, but they share the same title.

    5. The American Medical Association cares not a whit for our opinion on any subject. Why should we give a whit about their opinion on Civil Rights? But If the AMA wants to interfere with Constitutional Civil Rights, maybe the federal government should regulate them. Medical doctors could be forced to take Constitution classes, ethics classes, and Cultural Sensitivity Classes.

    Leave a Comment 10 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *