The American College of Surgeons statement on firearm injuries

[scaphoid]

http://www.facs.org/fellows_info/statements/st-12.html

[ST-12] Statement on Firearm Injuries

(Revised January 2013)

[by the American College of Surgeons]

The following revised Statement on Firearm Injuries was approved in January 2013 by the Officers of the American College of Surgeons and its Board of Regents. It replaces the February 2000 statement that was developed by the Committee on Trauma and approved by the College's Board of Regents—that statement replaced an initial statement addressing firearm injuries developed in 1991.

Because violence inflicted by guns continues to be a daily event in the United States and mass casualties involving firearms threaten the health and safety of the public, the American College of Surgeons supports:

1. Legislation banning civilian access to assault weapons, large ammunition clips, and munitions designed for military and law enforcement agencies.
2. Enhancing mandatory background checks for the purchase of firearms to include gun shows and auctions.
3. Ensuring that health care professionals can fulfill their role in preventing firearm injuries by health screening, patient counseling, and referral to mental health services for those with behavioral medical conditions.
4. Developing and promoting proactive programs directed at improving safe gun storage and the teaching of non-violent conflict resolution for a culture that often glorifies guns and violence in media and gaming.
5. Evidence-based research on firearm injury and the creation of a national firearm injury database to inform federal health policy.

What are your thoughts?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr.LeoSpaceman]

Makes sense.

As I've told many of my friends, you get a different perspective when you hang around in a trauma bay for a few months.

 

[armybound]

Cool.

And what do they propose that will actually make a difference in reducing gun crime and gun fatalities?

 

[dpmd]

After dealing with a lot of GSW's in residency, I have to say I would rather support effective use of guns to increase fatalities (and decrease the amount of work I have to do)

 

[Golding]

Makes sense.

As I've told many of my friends, you get a different perspective when you hang around in a trauma bay for a few months.

I'm not looking to ban motorcycles...

 

[Dr.LeoSpaceman]

I'm not looking to ban motorcycles...

Or ATVs. Or cars.

The difference being that the primary function of a handgun is to inflict harm. I suppose we could debate whether the primary purpose of those methods of transportation outweigh their potential for collateral damage, but that doesn't make them analogous to guns.

 

[45408]

Or ATVs. Or cars.

The difference being that the primary function of a handgun is to inflict harm. I suppose we could debate whether the primary purpose of those methods of transportation outweigh their potential for collateral damage, but that doesn't make them analogous to guns.

The handgun can do a lot more than inflict harm, and I'd say its primary function is to intimidate. The police don't need to shoot you in order to make effective use of their firearms.

Regardless, I've seen many many more people die from motorcycles than firearms, and the vast majority of our trauma is blunt. Seatbelts + no motorcycles + no ATVs would save a lot more lives.

 

[DoctwoB]

Cool.

And what do they propose that will actually make a difference in reducing gun crime and gun fatalities?

These measures certainly aren't perfect and can't stop violence from the millions of guns already in circulation, However they could certainly have an impact in reducing the flow of illegal guns, shutting down the small percentage of gun dealers that provide the majority of illegal guns, and reducing mortality rates of public shooting events by limiting clip sizes and such.

We make people pass a test and get licensed to handle one type of lethal weapon (a car), who not another?

 

[Miami_med]

It would be really nice if the ACS would simply stop expressing a formal opinion on this matter. If the ACS wants to be involved in politics, I could think of some bigger fish to fry that actually relate to the group represented by the college. I also suspect that there is no agreement amongst its membership on this issue, and I know many people who are FACS who wouldn't want to be associated with this opinion.

 

[45408]

We make people pass a test and get licensed to handle one type of lethal weapon (a car), who not another?

One has a constitutional amendment barring any infringement on your right to have it, and the other does not.

It would be really nice if the ACS would simply stop expressing a formal opinion on this matter. If the ACS wants to be involved in politics, I could think of some bigger fish to fry that actually relate to the group represented by the college. I also suspect that there is no agreement amongst its membership on this issue, and I know many people who are FACS who wouldn't want to be associated with this opinion.

No kidding. There are already too many political entities involved that I really don't think ACS has any place in this debate. We've got plenty of other issues to deal with. Too many cooks in this kitchen.

 

[Golding]

Or ATVs. Or cars.

The difference being that the primary function of a handgun is to inflict harm. I suppose we could debate whether the primary purpose of those methods of transportation outweigh their potential for collateral damage, but that doesn't make them analogous to guns.

I agree with Prowler's response, though I probably wouldn't have been able to put it as succinctly. I also agree that ACS should stay out of this particular political debate, since they naturally imply representation of surgeons homogeneously.

I question how many GSW's I've seen have come from registered handguns to begin with. That's more along the reason why I wrote what I wrote. You know what would really cut down on the gruesome trauma that I see regularly in the trauma bay? Making drunk driving illegal.

 

[scaphoid]

A google search for "American College of Surgeons statement on firearms" came up with the following commentary on other message boards. The first statement is from a trauma surgeon on faculty at Penn State:

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=483679

The second statement seems to come from a physician in California.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=10239787#post10239787

 

[spartywrx]

More BS from people who know nothing about guns. More kids die in pools every year than by "assault rifle." Let's see the ACS every try to define "assault rifle."

Lets outlaw "assault weapons", which are used in less than 2% of firearm related homicides, which firearm homicides are about 50% of all homicides. Instead lets keep large caliber, powerful hunting rifles available, which do way more damage than a 5.56x45mm. Lets ban a non existent problem even though there are very powerful constitutional issues related to this topic.

Never go full ******. The ACS just went full ******.

 

[skiz knot]

Cool.

And what do they propose that will actually make a difference in reducing gun crime and gun fatalities?

See 1-5.

 

[armybound]

See 1-5.

Targeting weapons responsible for less than 3% of gun crime is hardly the approach to making a real difference. It may make you feel good about "doing something" but overall it's meaningless.

I don't even know what "munitions designed for military and law enforcement agencies" are.

 

[45408]

See 1-5.

Has any of #5 even been applied to #1-4?


Not really.

 

[ajh1983]

Once again, how about society learns to start holding people responsible for their actions instead of introducing expensive, ineffective "bandaids" to appease the masses (see idiots). All gun control does is control guns, not the loony-toons who use and abuse them. How many firearm related crimes are commited with weapons obtained through legal means? I don't have a figure, but I know it's not the majority. Enforcing unconstitutional gun control only limits my (the legal, respectful gun owner) ability to defend myself from the above mentioned wack jobs.

These are same idiots who feel entitled to everything they are unwilling to earn. Want to help gun crime? Start placing emphasis on mental health screening during K12 years, instead of cutting educational funding for use in malignant foreign policy.

There... I think I incorporated every topic possible.

/rant.