I've been a lurker for awhile, and I know that this post has been brought up 1-2 times in the last 2 years that I've been an RN. So... you grouchy old farts that would rather I'd revive an old post can just stuff a sock in it. I want to gauge opinions based on our CURRENT situation after the shooting yesterday in San Bernadino, CA.
Truth be told, One single caregiver with a concealed carry permit could have shut this couple down before they hit 14 fatalities.
I plan on getting my CC in January, but I know as an RN, should my handgun be discovered, I'll probably lose my license. It will stay in my car when I am at work. If someone wants to carry out mayhem at my workplace, we are ALL sitting ducks. It is not ok or fair. What are your thoughts?
Chicago is "gun free" and has the highest gun related homicide rate in the country, but practically everyone is armed in Texas, and shootings are rare there.
Chicago does not have the highest homicide rate in the country, it's rate is about half that of cities in the top 10. It's not "gun free" either, they used to have very restrictive gun laws but those were overturned in 2010. The homicide rate in Texas in 2014 was 4.4 (per 100,000 ppl), the same as gun-restrictive California.
Chicago does not have the highest homicide rate in the country, it's rate is about half that of cities in the top 10. It's not "gun free" either, they used to have very restrictive gun laws but those were overturned in 2010. The homicide rate in Texas in 2014 was 4.4 (per 100,000 ppl), the same as gun-restrictive California.
Isn't that interesting. So gun-restricitions did not seem to lower California's homicide rate?
I don't think that can be true though, there are so many on here assuring me that restricting gun access would reduce crime.
Sort of, the word "militia" by itself refers to a group of citizen soldiers, which can be either an organized or unorganized militia. The term "well regulated" in the context of a group of soldiers means well organized and well trained, so "well regulated militia" isn't referring to just ordinary citizens with guns. As a gun owner, I'm all for taking the other option, which is that it refers to general gun ownership but with sufficient restrictions on possession of guns, but we can't really just ignore parts of the amendment and suggest it's just referring to unlimited possession of guns by everyone.
Edit: Akula covered it perfectly
Edit 2. Did you know the MLK was killed with a Remington model 760 gamemaster pump action 30-06 rifle. A very very very popular hunting rifle...and several times more powerful than the scary ar15 .223
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Are we in nursery school? What's next - calling them dooky-heads?
The problem with the whole gun debate is this neener-neener approach to the discussion. Both sides of the discussion have valid concerns and it's high time we respect that.
And, for the record, I do not assume that all gun owners are idiots. But some are ... and I have read no suggestion for effectively screening out the George Zimmermans of this world. Until there is, armed caregivers are an oxymoron in any healthcare setting except maybe in home health (and I still have personal reservations about that).
I would suggest that we ought to have concern about who owns and carry handguns in this country. We have evidence that legal owners shoot people for stupid reasons...in theaters because they used their cell phone, in parking lots because the music was too loud in the car, etc.
Similarly, we have evidence that some legal gun owners do not properly store or maintain their weapons allowing them to be accidentally discharged by children or taken from their possession by people who are not able to purchase their own. We have a serious problem with accidental shooting death and injury in this country and yet, as a people, we seem to care more about a deeply held perception that the government is trying to disarm us than we do about consequences of widespread availability of weapons and ammunition.
I continue to maintain that if a caregiver is carrying a loaded weapon into the care environment then the patient and/or family has a RIGHT to know that information and to choose a different caregiver should that be an issue for them.
Chicago does not have the highest homicide rate in the country, it's rate is about half that of cities in the top 10. It's not "gun free" either, they used to have very restrictive gun laws but those were overturned in 2010. The homicide rate in Texas in 2014 was 4.4 (per 100,000 ppl), the same as gun-restrictive California.
But only looking at gun related homicides and violence, the data is murkier.
"There's no question that Chicago sees more gun violence than the rest of the country. Using data on mass shootings -- defined here as incidents in which four or more people were shot -- we can compare Chicago to the rest of the country. Since 2013, Chicago has seen 207 people wounded in mass shooting incidents and 32 killed -- far more than any other city."
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question: Whether the following provisions, D.C. Code §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22–4504(a), and 7-2507.02, violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?
Specializes in E/R, Med/Surg, PCU, Mom-Baby, ICU, more.
Yes, I know what gerrymandering means and that's precisely what you are doing when you ignore what is known about Zimmerman's character and behavior before and since the shooting. Just like what political parties are doing when they carefully draw district boundaries to favor their own party and disadvantage their opponents. It's called "metaphor".
You are using a deliberate misreading of my post as an excuse to derail the discussion into something completely irrelevant.
Your hole deepens every time you try to make me feel stupid... I suggest you stop digging.
Your comment shows the truth! LOl!!! Gerrymandering as a metaphor! That is the ticket!
Now explain to all of us how Trayvon got 70 yards away from the place he was staying at despite the fact that he made it back.
Specializes in E/R, Med/Surg, PCU, Mom-Baby, ICU, more.
Unless you include frightened police officers, you have a point. The hordes of accidental shooters are probably hanging out with the hordes of gunmen planning to invade healthcare facilities.
I would suggest that we ought to have concern about who owns and carry handguns in this country. We have evidence that legal owners shoot people for stupid reasons...in theaters because they used their cell phone, in parking lots because the music was too loud in the car, etc.
Similarly, we have evidence that some legal gun owners do not properly store or maintain their weapons allowing them to be accidentally discharged by children or taken from their possession by people who are not able to purchase their own. We have a serious problem with accidental shooting death and injury in this country and yet, as a people, we seem to care more about a deeply held perception that the government is trying to disarm us than we do about consequences of widespread availability of weapons and ammunition.
I continue to maintain that if a caregiver is carrying a loaded weapon into the care environment then the patient and/or family has a RIGHT to know that information and to choose a different caregiver should that be an issue for them.
We have irresponsible people driving cars. People drink and drive, they drive while sleep deprived, they text, eat, read ect while driving, they get angry and drive their cars into crowds of people. People have accidently ran over children from improper operation of cars. We don't have enough car control. I say we ban cars and require everyone to take public transportation. After all, the bus and train drivers are highly trained and are required to go to driving school. Let's leave the driving to the professionals, since the average citizen is too irresponsible to be behind the controls of a 3500 lb dangerous weapon like a car. Besides, the constitution doesn't say a damn thing about people having a right to drive their own car. Think about all the lives we will save.
You are completely over-reacting to folk who drive cars, I suppose you have catch straws in the wind to
up your argument on ownership of guns which is hardly rational.
Clearly I'm not against people driving cars. It was an example of how ridiculous the gun control argument is. Oh, and I don't have to "catch straws in the wind." My right to own guns is still constitutionally protected.
I want to gauge opinions based on our CURRENT situation after the shooting yesterday in San Bernadino, CA. 
MunoRN, RN
8,058 Posts
Chicago does not have the highest homicide rate in the country, it's rate is about half that of cities in the top 10. It's not "gun free" either, they used to have very restrictive gun laws but those were overturned in 2010. The homicide rate in Texas in 2014 was 4.4 (per 100,000 ppl), the same as gun-restrictive California.