Circuit Court Upholds Florida’s “Docs v. Glocks” Law

For a lot of reasons, I have to agree with Eugene Volokh’s opinion on the matter. I don’t agree that enacting a restriction on one constitutional right to protect another is the right thing to do. But it is a strategically smart thing to do if you’re interested in sticking it to the organizations that represent the medical profession, and have been promoting all manner of anti-gun propaganda via the power and influence doctors have over society. That’s what I think the strategy was here. I can’t support it, but I can see the logic.

All this would not be an issue if the doctors would agree that the practice of medicine should not be politicized in the way it has.

6 Responses to “Circuit Court Upholds Florida’s “Docs v. Glocks” Law”

  1. Brad says:

    Interesting. I have to agree the Florida law is over broad and the court decision upholding the law is troublesome.

    But those damned doctors!

    The whole thing of doctors lording over gun owners reminds me of the class aspects of gun control. Gun control is about the rich and powerful trying to disarm the poor and powerless. Gun control isn’t about crime control.

  2. Divemedic says:

    I actually agree with the decision. Here is why: Under Obamacare, your medical records are now accessible to the government. Anything you tell your doctor, you are telling an agent of the US government.

    This law doesn’t restrict the speech rights of the doctor while he is not acting in his capacity as a doctor, any more than the Medicare regulation that requires him to perform certain acts.

    While he is off work and not acting as a doctor, he is free to ask anyone about their gun ownership.

  3. rd says:

    It all comes down to knowledge and expertise. If my primary care doctor advises me on blood pressure, diabates risk, etc., I will listen closely to her advice. Her treatment has improved my life, and kept me relatively healthy.

    She has no, none, zero background on firearms, gun safety, or even how a gun operates. This I already know. I would quite frankly view any firearms related recommendations from her as unknowledgeable, operating outside her knowledge base, and even *medical boundary violations.* I think her medical clinic management and malpractice insurance company would agree. So to simplify life, the generic intake form firearms question does not get answered. I have no children for her to interrogate and possibly hector or browbeat.

    At other medical clinics I will listen to firearms advice from Dr. Chiropractor/ Pheasants Forever/ Ducks Unlimited / FFL. He’s the guy that brings his family to all the dinners AND supplies some of the door prizes. But he does not need to discuss firearms, as he does not see them as hazards.

  4. Jim says:

    When my kids were young their (female) doctor asked us about guns. I told her they’ve been shooting since they were 6 years old, end of conversation.

  5. Chas says:

    Bad day for cultural Marxists who are delighted by outrageously unethical behavior when it advances their agenda.

  6. AnOregonian says:

    What I don’t get is why the 2nd and 3rd rulings felt it necessary to go further. The first ruling was not only sufficient and consistent with existing laws, but it was somewhat reasonable too.


  1. Doctors and Guns - […] The Volokh Conspiracy discusses doctors talking about guns with patients in the context of Florida's law banning it and…