The "stay in their lane" controversy

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Pyrrho
Posts: 26085
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Has thanked: 2729 times
Been thanked: 2821 times

The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Pyrrho » Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:42 pm

For what it's worth.

Article:

http://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/27098 ... m-american

The NRA told the medical community to "stay in their lane".

Physicians, many of the ER docs and others, have been responding to the NRA with "This is our lane," often with graphic descriptions of how they treat gunshot wounds.

https://twitter.com/search?q=this%20is% ... e&src=tyah

https://twitter.com/search?q=this%20is% ... e&src=tyah
Last edited by Pyrrho on Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 33438
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 460 times
Been thanked: 788 times

Re: The "Stay in your lane" controversy

Post by ed » Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:47 pm

Sounds like misdirection given this::

The third-leading cause of death in US most doctors don't want you to know about. A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. ... Medical errors are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.Feb 22, 2018
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/22/medical ... erica.html
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Pyrrho
Posts: 26085
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Has thanked: 2729 times
Been thanked: 2821 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Pyrrho » Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:48 pm

Sure. Your post is an excellent example of a material fallacy of irrelevance, ed.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 33438
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 460 times
Been thanked: 788 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by ed » Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:58 pm

No, it is an observation as to motive.

Clearly the medical industry would like to avoid publicity regarding their own failings. Given that, one might rightly examine their methodology and data manipulation when it comes to what is obviously misdirection.

Sniff test is this: given that the number of deaths that the medical industry is responsible for is about five times the deaths due to firearms, one might reasonably expect the ratio of "learned" articles, ie. iatrogenic to firearms, to follow that proportion.

Falsifiable prediction: they don't.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 8968
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 144 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by xouper » Sun Nov 11, 2018 1:51 pm

Pyrrho wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:42 pm
Article:

http://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/27098 ... m-american

The NRA told the medical community to "stay in their lane".

Physicians, many of the ER docs and others, have been responding to the NRA with "This is our lane," often with graphic descriptions of how they treat gunshot wounds.
And other experts argue it is not their lane.

The medical issues surrounding treating gunshot wounds is not in the same lane as advocating public policy regarding things that (for the most part) have no medical issues whatsoever.

Gun ownership is not a public health issue, it is a public policy issue, in fact it is explicitly a Constitutional issue. They are two separate lanes. The NRA is correct on this point.

This point has been addressed before on this forum:
viewtopic.php?p=910154#p910154

Reposted here:

The CDC report cited above makes a similar argument in trying to justify why the CDC should be involved in a matter that has traditionally been handled by the Justice Department. (See page 16, the section called "Firearm-Related Violence as a Public Health Issue".) The CDC report makes some interesting and rational sounding points, but fails to address the main objections to framing the matter as a health issue.

Here is a counter argument written by a physician.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/ ... c80cce431d

No, Gun Violence Is Not a 'Public Health' Issue
Paul Hsieh, Contributor, Jul 28, 2014

It's a short editorial and he makes four general points, but here is the snippet that in my opinion kills the whole idea that gun violence is a health issue:
www.forbes.com wrote:. . . There are some who argue that “public health” is not just limited to the spread of diseases, but also includes so-called “social determinants of health,” such as “inequality, poverty, and education.” This is how they try to include issues such as “gun violence” or “climate change” as part of “public health.” Under this approach, any public policy issue that affected human prosperity and longevity could be framed as a “public health” issue. For example, would raising the minimum wage worsen or reduce “inequality” — and thus worsen or reduce “public health”? Do free market economic reforms reduce poverty — and thus improve “public health”? If we take this approach to its logical endpoint, “public health” merely reduces to public policy in general, rendering the term “public health” nearly meaningless.
Here's a more recent editorial in Forbes:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorburr ... 1ce6ae37b0

No, Guns Are Not A 'Public Health Crisis'
Trevor Burrus, Contributor, Jun 16, 2016

This snippet nails it:
Trevor Burrus, Forbes contributor, wrote:. . . Gun violence may be widespread, but that does not turn it into a “public health crisis.”

Bullets do not float around in the air, randomly finding victims and then multiplying to infect more.

Guns are possessed by individuals, not owned by the “public,” and more than 99 percent of those guns will never be used to commit a crime.

Moreover, many people derive benefits from guns, both in terms of enjoying owning them and by protecting themselves from attackers.

. . . there is no “scientific” answer to whether you should have a gun in your home any more than there is a “scientific” answer to whether you should own a pool, a stove, or a gas fire pit, all of which can pose dangers to children and others.

There are risks and there are rewards, and only you can decide whether the benefits outweigh the costs.
When framed that way, gun violence is clearly not a health issue.

As you (and the CDC) argue, and I agree, the problem of gun violence is amenable to using the methods and tools from epidemiology and other experts, but that is not sufficient reason to reframe the matter as a health issue, nor does the CDC have a monopoly on those methods of analysis.

As always, Your Mileage May VaryTM.

User avatar
Skeeve
Posts: 10549
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Skeeve » Sun Nov 11, 2018 2:06 pm

Would you really expect them to?
Then Skank Of America could start in...

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 14102
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 364 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by WildCat » Sun Nov 11, 2018 2:10 pm

Pyrrho wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:48 pm
Sure. Your post is an excellent example of a material fallacy of irrelevance, ed.
As you post the doctors' "appeal to authority" fallacy.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Giz
Posts: 1341
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: UK
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 287 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Giz » Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:38 pm

Pyrrho wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:48 pm
Sure. Your post is an excellent example of a material fallacy of irrelevance, ed.
The amount of that, and how it spreads on the net... sounds like a public health issue!

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 20267
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 679 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by corplinx » Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:51 pm

Are the majority of these bullet wounds being treated in high gun control or low control environments?

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 20267
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 679 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by corplinx » Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:53 pm

If they are making simple connections like, "I see gunshot wounds, therefore we need gun control", maybe they could help make gun control more narrow and surgical.

Perhaps they would like to identify gender and race most likely to be affected so we know who to apply gun control to.

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 20267
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 679 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by corplinx » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:23 pm

Sales of firearms should be subject to satisfactory completion of a criminal background check and proof of satisfactory completion of an appropriate educational program on firearms safety.
This is proposal 1.
a. we already do background checks
b. I agree with them, guns in the hands of untrained people are a public safety hazard. You are of no use to a "well armed militia" if you are likely to shoot yourself or the guy next to you.
ACP supports strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit convicted domestic violence offenders from purchasing or possessing firearms. Domestic violence offenders include dating partners, cohabitants, stalkers, and those who victimize a family member other than a partner or child. ACP supports federal legislation to require that such domestic violence offenders be reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
I am worried that people will be vindictively accused of stalking in order to grief/harass them. But on the surface I have no issue with this.
b. Although there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of waiting periods in reducing homicides, waiting periods may reduce the incidence of death by suicide, which account for nearly two thirds of firearm deaths, and should be considered as part of a comprehensive approach to reducing preventable firearms-related deaths.
Unpopular opinion: it is your right to off yourself.
ACP opposes concealed-carry reciprocity legislation that would force every state to accept concealed-carry weapons permits from other states
Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you. I think recipriocity should be federally mandated in fact as long as the originating permit meets federal minimums. Meaning, if I want to take a road trip, I don't want to need a lawyer to understand the implications of traveling with a firearm in every state.

This is where I think this document goes from "boiling the frog slowly" to outright anti-gun "trust us, we're doctors" bullshit.
The College supports a ban on firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or standard security screening devices, including but not limited to 3D-printed firearms.
Are we back to Plastic Glocks aren't detected at airports FakeNews from 20 years ago? Jesus Christ.
The College favors strong penalties and criminal prosecution for those who sell firearms illegally and those who legally purchase firearms for those who are banned from possessing them (“straw purchases”).
This is so uncontroversial and universally supported that it doesn't need be included. It's like saying, "we support breathing air". This is ivory tower syndrome on display. Maybe they should stay in their lane?
The American College of Physicians recommends that guns be subject to consumer product regulations regarding access, safety, and design. In addition, the College supports law enforcement measures, including required use of tracer elements or taggants on ammunition and weapons, and identifying markings, such as serial numbers on weapons, to aid in the identification of weapons used in crimes.
And here we run right into the snake-oil. These solutions are quackery and really meant to be a backdoor way to ban firearms. You basically pull a California and say "X has to be traceable by 2020" and you fool the low information voters into voting for it because it sounds reasonable. "well, they have til 2020 to figure it out". This is bad medicine.

Also, firearms already have serials.
ACP favors a comprehensive definition, including generic feature tests, of semiautomatic firearms that are designed to increase their rapid killing capacity that would be subject to a ban on sale, ownership, and transfer, to ensure that these firearms are no longer lawful in the United States and in individual states. This comprehensive definition should include effective regulation of grandfathered weapons.
And we go right into gun confiscation based on people who have no idea what guns are or how they work, trying to define assault weapon.


Basically, it's your typical "start with the easy stuff, ease into the stuff where we have no idea what we're talking about, then go right into the activist talking points".

Beam me up Mr. Speaker. Maybe the NRA has a point.

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 20267
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 679 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by corplinx » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:25 pm

ACP favors a comprehensive definition, including generic feature tests, of people likely to commit gun crimes
Let me change one line from their proposal to show how much they skirt around correlation vs causation. Looking through the statistics, I see no evidence women should ever be subject to undue gun control. The problem is mostly with men.

User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 19787
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 11:46 pm
Title: Bruce of all Bruces
Location: Massachusetts
Has thanked: 313 times
Been thanked: 490 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Bruce » Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:56 am

Special interest group fight!!!


We need more of this in politics. I want to see the pro-life people take on the pro-legalize marijuana people. No, actually the more obscure and differing the better. How about free trade vs anti-vax?
Such potential!

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 8968
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 144 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by xouper » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:17 am

Bruce wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:56 am
Special interest group fight!!!


We need more of this in politics. I want to see the pro-life people take on the pro-legalize marijuana people. No, actually the more obscure and differing the better. How about free trade vs anti-vax?
Like perhaps these two groups (guns vs drugs):

Image


Or these two groups (abortion vs guns):

Image

User avatar
ed
Posts: 33438
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 460 times
Been thanked: 788 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by ed » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:25 am

Couple of points.
b. Although there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of waiting periods in reducing homicides, waiting periods may reduce the incidence of death by suicide, which account for nearly two thirds of firearm deaths, and should be considered as part of a comprehensive approach to reducing preventable firearms-related deaths.
Cali requires a waiting period regardless of prior gun ownership. That is to say that you have to "wait" even if you demonstrably already own guns. If this were voting, it would be an undue burden. Same thing here, it is nothing more than harassment.
The College supports a ban on firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or standard security screening devices, including but not limited to 3D-printed firearms.
They immediately go from having a considered opinion to either 1) engaging in witchcraft or 2) demonstrating zero understanding of firearms
The College favors strong penalties and criminal prosecution for those who sell firearms illegally and those who legally purchase firearms for those who are banned from possessing them (“straw purchases”).
I won't repeat my prior posts wherein I point out how many decades such behavior would earn one in the slammer if the laws were enforced.
The American College of Physicians recommends that guns be subject to consumer product regulations regarding access, safety, and design. In addition, the College supports law enforcement measures, including required use of tracer elements or taggants on ammunition and weapons, and identifying markings, such as serial numbers on weapons, to aid in the identification of weapons used in crimes.
Aside from the palpable silliness of the latter part of this (and the demonstration, again, that they are really ignorant) this is a way to increase the cost of firearms to a point where demand would be impacted.

I have a basic problem with laws that adress things that are non-issues. They are going to regulate "design"?

This:

Also, firearms already have serials.
ACP favors a comprehensive definition, including generic feature tests, of semiautomatic firearms that are designed to increase their rapid killing capacity that would be subject to a ban on sale, ownership, and transfer, to ensure that these firearms are no longer lawful in the United States and in individual states. This comprehensive definition should include effective regulation of grandfathered weapons.
ie "Never trust anything we promise"

All of which supports my position:

The answer is "No". Now, what are you offering me?
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 67871
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 3471 times
Been thanked: 2196 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Doctor X » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:08 pm

An appeal to an actual relevant authority is not an "appeal to authority" fallacy."

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 8968
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 144 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by xouper » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:00 pm

Doctor X wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:08 pm
An appeal to an actual relevant authority is not an "appeal to authority" fallacy."

--J.D.
Correct. But that’s not what happened here.

Doctors are not “relevant authorities” in this argument.

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 14102
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 364 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by WildCat » Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:02 pm

Doctor X wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:08 pm
An appeal to an actual relevant authority is not an "appeal to authority" fallacy."

--J.D.
Medical doctors are not authorities in either crime control or firearms safety.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Giz
Posts: 1341
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: UK
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 287 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Giz » Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:08 pm

If anything can be called a "public health issue", perhaps we should amend "one man, one vote" to "one doctor, one vote".

I don't know where these hicks get their chutzpah. Disagreeing with doctors about public policy? ?!

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 20029
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 610 times
Been thanked: 605 times

Re: The "stay in their lane" controversy

Post by Rob Lister » Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:43 am

WildCat wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:02 pm
Doctor X wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:08 pm
An appeal to an actual relevant authority is not an "appeal to authority" fallacy."

--J.D.
Medical doctors are not authorities in either crime control or firearms safety.
If they were campaigning against lead poisoning, I could see their point.