Doctor Doctor, Tell Me The News ...

Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) frequently publish articles describing the way that anti-gun activists (aka: "Gun Grabbers") warp news reporting to put the blame for gun violence not on criminals and mad men, but on ... well, "responsible gun owners".

Several professionals contribute to this site.

Here, Dr. M.S. Brown provides what may be regarded as satire describing the preferred talking points for anti-gun news articles.  Only the first paragraph is quoted; you are encouraged to "GRTWT" (Go Read The Whole Thing): but since this was published 2 years ago, I suppose I will have to do an internet search to find the implied "Part 2". 
Or you will.

Here's a teaser:

The 2016 Journalist’s Guide to Gun Violence Coverage–Part 1 – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:

Guns are a sad fact of life in American culture and are a major topic in modern journalism. As a Journalist, you have a duty to get involved and make a difference in this important societal debate. By following certain guidelines, the concerned Journalist can be assured of having the maximum impact on this shameful American problem. The concepts discussed here apply both to broadcast and print media. For the purposes of this Guide, our work is divided between routine stories about gun violence and the broader coverage of the political debate about gun control. They are both equally important. Let us first address the proper way to construct a news story involving common gun crimes.

I can't wait for Part II to be published! 

And by the way in case you didn't notice .. the Good Doctors use satire to emphasize their pro-Second Amendment political position.   
So if you go to the original article and start ranting ...  you may embarrass yourself.

Anti-Gun Research

Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) has another article for your edification. 

As always, I highly recommend it for your enjoyment ... what you learn is a bonus.

This group is one I privately refer to as "The Good Doctors".  The contributors are smarter than politicians  (which sounds like 'damning with faint praise') and more societally productive. More, they report what they see; not what they think somebody wants to hear.

Since my opinions are usually very much in accord with their writings, I naturally think they're about the smartest people on earth.   I've linked to their articles several times in the past, and I expect I'll be doing so for the foreseeable future, because all of the authors are skillful writers and highly readable.

Read this short except (link below) from the latest article, and if you've not previously been acquainted with their body of work, I'm sure you'll dig into the archives and read more articles.     In fact, if this is your first introduction, I envy you the experience of discovery.  I've been reading their articles for a couple of years and never felt I had a better use for my time.

Well, except for Range Time, of course.

Anti-Gun Research, or, How to Gain Notoriety While Accomplishing Nothing – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:
In order to maintain freedom and resist enslavement, free people must be competent with firearms.  The use of guns can never be made risk free or completely safe. Unlike exploding skate boards, guns are necessary to free societies. 

It’s not guns but anti-gun “researchers” that menace the present age.  They turn out the worst type of useless, Pot Boiler studies of injury and death to whine about. We can only hope that anti-gun “researchers” stop wasting everyone’s time and get real jobs.  ....................

 Go, read the whole thing!

Doctors ... talk funny

Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Line of Fire – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:

 Americans have been spared a potentially devastating assault on our right to armed self defense, thanks in no small part to the efforts of gun rights organizations and the votes of gun owners across the country.  But until laws and judicial appointments secure these critical victories, our patient will not be out of the woods.  The Second Amendment has made it to the transplant unit, but continuing efforts are still required lest it succumb. 

 Despite his recent statements, prior to the presidential election cycle Donald Trump’s public positions on the right to keep and bear arms have been at best inconsistent.  It is imperative that supporters of the Second Amendment maintain the pressure on the incoming Trump administration and other politicians to make the appointments and enact the legislation that they have promised.  Until these steps have been completed, our patient is not out of jeopardy.  

 Until a Second Amendment friendly majority is re-established on the Supreme Court, our right to keep and bear arms lingers near death.  Until national concealed carry reciprocity is established, like “The Boy in the Plastic Bubble,” our personal freedoms will continue to end at arbitrary lines on the map.  Until federally mandated, so-called “gun free zones” are abolished, our schoolchildren will remain targets for those bent on evil.  Until the National Firearms Act of 1934 is reformed, pointless restrictions that contribute nothing to public safety will continue to plague us.  Ill-conceived and arbitrary magazine capacity bans will continue to afflict us until that issue is effectively addressed as well. 

But they speak the truth.  (Well, these guys do!)

CA Prop 63: Treat a Civil Right as a Public Health Problem

Inland Empire Doctors Treat a Civil Right as a Public Health Problem: 

(by Doctors For Responsible Gun Ownership [DRGO]  member T. Wheeler) November 09, 2016

Inland Empire Doctors Treat a Civil Right as a Public Health Problem

Posted on November 9, 2016 by AmmolandDRGO Editor: Dr. Wheeler, a San Bernardino County Medical Society member for 35 years, received a member satisfaction survey. This letter to Society president Michael Sequeira, MD resulted.

Read more: https://drgo.us/?p=4482#ixzz4PgnUAv4f
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

Proposition 63 will turn a huge fraction of California’s 8 to 12 million gun owners into criminals with the stroke of a pen. Many who don’t follow politics closely will not even be aware of their new status as criminals, because most people quite reasonably believe that crime laws are intended to catch and punish real criminals—those who rob, rape, steal, and murder—and not everyday citizens merely exercising their civil right to own a firearm.  

 Proposition 63 will create several new crimes, including possession of firearms and even simply parts of firearms that have until now been deemed legal by our legislature. Millions of Californians have owned these firearms for years.
Why does the San Bernardino County Medical Society believe they now deserve prison time, the destruction of their lives and the suffering of their families? The good people that the San Bernardino County Medical Society wants to see prosecuted include people we work with every day—nurses, students, even our fellow physicians. 

 I wonder if the leaders of our Society grasp that they are supporting the criminalization of many of our patients who own firearms. Our law enforcement leaders understand the injustice being done to millions of innocent Californians by out-of-control politicians in Sacramento.  

No less than the sheriffs of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange Counties oppose further gun control laws, including specifically Proposition 63. The growing list of California law enforcement agencies opposing Proposition 63 includes the California State Sheriff’s Association, California Police Chiefs Association, Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, and many others.

 I can’t conceive of a San Bernardino County Medical Society that would support a law making it illegal for African Americans to vote. The notion that our Society would eagerly urge a statewide confiscation of Bibles from devout Christians under pain of prosecution is equally abhorrent. But what the San Bernardino County Medical Society has done with its support of Proposition 63 is precisely the same kind of oppression.

Dr. Timothy Wheeler has been writing about 2nd Amendment rights on the "Doctors for Preservation of Gun Rights (DRGO) website for several years.  Many doctors protest 2nd amendment rights because, as they say; "we have to treat the victims of Firearms Violence".

(Which is a reasonable protest, but nobody mentions that many of the firearms victims they treat did not have the opportunity to defend themselves against violent felons because the victims were not armed.)

Dr. Wheeler is no less experienced, but he recognizes that firearms may also be used to protect the innocent ... which not all of his colleagues notice.

The DRGO website is one which I frequently visit, because it provides insights to firearms violence which are not commonly found ... well, any other place on the Internet.
________________________________________________

Proposition 63: Mother Jones Loves It!