1 Child or Youth suffers gunshot injury each day in Ontario

Right, and they also said other things, which begs the question.
if they know the data is lacking, if they know there are gaping holes, if they know more studies need to be done. If they are or were indeed and I quote

"Hey, here are the groups we need to look at for prevention strategies. These are the injuries that are occurring, and we need to really contextualize them and understand them"

1) No, your studies haven't shown anything, that anyone who knows just the slightest little bit about 16-24 year old guys and criminal elements don't already know...But they certainly by your own words and admission, need to be understood.......that does not mean any intervention, or targeted measures are needed. Not remotely. They haven't shown "squat", let alone do they understand what or why or anything......

and other things they had to say.
*****

No wonder gun owners are reacting..........

Any Dr worth their degrees knows you don't cut a patient open without first knowing and understanding what the problem is. Any scientist knows you don't take action, without first....A) Establishing there is a problem and B) knowing what it is, understanding what it is
Cant fix it without first....

Its not "rocket science"
/grin, wink etc

Very simply, on what grounds are they calling for targeted preventative measures....
Hey I have any idea, Im a Dr, theres maybe something, we don't if theres a problem, we don't know if there is what it is, or why it is.

Lets give everyone Rabbies Vaccines just incase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bardern

Brian Lilly spoke with the authors and they as much said that they have no idea on the percentage of actual firearm related injuries. Sorry I cant get the link to open

---

These are links to Brian Lilley's analysis of the study. I always enjoy hearing his point of view on controversial subjects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaotT3nHhyI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDQND5UVAoU

The first line spoken on the CBC on this "Doctors need to ask questions about the type of guns that injure children when they are treated in the emergency department".

The answer to that is NO, they are not police officers/detectives and frankly my medical information and especially my children,s/grandchildrens is private and protected by privacy laws. My only reply would be there was an accidental discharge of a device that fired a shot.

Should there be a law enacted that required the public and youth of tender age to answer questions by a Doctor, then the Doctors would have to be trained in taking statements and giving cautions and rights to counsel.Should they then get answers they would be compelled to attend court,how would all that go down with them.

Leave well this alone, the Police, CO,S ,Doctors all have their roles in society and the Fed,s have their roles in gun legislation.

Gilroy, I don't mind mandatory reporting or whatever we want to call it. It's done a lot of good for victims of child abuse. "Just saying".

Often (most often?) society agrees that we should do X for the "greater good", even if it means some inconvenience or whatever label one chooses to use (seat belts an obvious one), child safety restraints another...

At "what point" is X a problem that warrants change?

How about the medical professionals and politicians and yes even the far right gun owners decide that first???

Take the omg it's so astonishing the boys will be boys epidemic, that has the streets running red revelations.

Targeted measures.
On the surface sounds like storage and access might (note that word) be the root.

Is there an obvious weakness or hole in our current laws? More that can or needs to be done?
Um no, because the same people will crow about how safe Canada is. And the stats back that up. 2.6 per capita and that includes suicides...and if they would focus on gangs/guns.
So how much of a problem do we have?
Please

Is reducing that (what ever minuscule number is left) worthwhile?
Sure, why not. But first......

But if we to run around screaming the sky is falling, we have bigger problems we can do something about. Like roads running red.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Should there be a law enacted that required the public and youth of tender age to answer questions by a Doctor, then the Doctors would have to be trained in taking statements and giving cautions and rights to counsel.Should they then get answers they would be compelled to attend court,how would all that go down with them.

---

1. Nobody is proposing a law that would force anyone to answer such questions.
2. Asking questions as to how an accident occurred is universally acknowledged to be a doctor's job. It's simply taking a history.
3. That history is protected by doctor-patient confidentiality.

And, before you talk about privacy....
4. Confidentiality is not violated by the use of aggregate data in statistical analysis.

I'm coming late to this subject, but at first glance it seems to me that the headline - children and youths - isn't a good descriptor for the scope of the study: 24 years of age and under. When you consider that most of the dead or wounded gangbangers/druggies in our major cities fall into this category, and that a good chunk of them are members of what could be called immigrant gangs, then the headlines and the other claims can be seen in a different light.

Ottawa is a pretty small city as far as urban centers are concerned, but it had a heck of a lot of shootings, and as you can see from this story, none of them appeared to be "accidents", and most involved victims (and accused persons) from immigrant communities. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...view-1.3870975

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigbear

. When you consider that most of the dead or wounded gangbangers/druggies in our major cities fall into this category, and that a good chunk of them are members of what could be called immigrant gangs, then the headlines and the other claims can be seen in a different light.

---

Your right on topic...I find it interesting that the demographic findings of the report have not garnered any attention..nary a word by the Liberal media.

Which explains why people get their backs up. Immediately "think the worst" etc.

But hey, when you have click bait headlines, and juicy quotes like " 1 child every day being shot", "no other commercially available product" etc. It raises questions, more than a few. No argument the media took it and did its thing, but the authors certainly gave them plenty of good sound bytes, and for that, theres only a couple reasons why. Surely the good Drs are in fact smart to know......a couple of things.

And it's a bit of shame because there just might be something worth looking into deeper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Your right on topic...I find it interesting that the demographic findings of the report have not garnered any attention..nary a word by the Liberal media.

---

Heaven forbid the media actually calls a spade a spade,especially,the liberal dopes we deal with,now. Political correctness,dontchaknow.

As is often the case the Sun ( Lilley) calls a spade a spade.
Not much that different from the you tube vid, other than perhaps he is rightfully calling for the report to be retracted. Its flawed, badly so.

And for a group of "so called" scientist, Drs, who should A) Know how to do research and B) Know you can't "operate on a patient without proper diagnosis and more.......

C) Thats Astonishing.

No doubt, many that lean left or lean towards GC will think its the right spinning, write it and him off as rhetorical hyperbole. Gee pot calling the kettle black?

When gun owners who are without question "under seige", and without question theres well established history of well "things"...react...."just over reacting, or spins or A-Z"....And of coarse everything that's said or done by the left, or politicians or leo themselves is gospel, or altruistic...
lol, people, human nature.....Its the same no mater which way you lean. But one thing isn't.
Certain groups, certain people, certain "professionals". Once the trust is broken........

What are the take aways here? Well forest for the trees.
Even now, people (here and online in social media) are focusing on the media and how they've blown it out of porportion.
When we have DOCTORS who pretty obviously have agendas, and using very flawed "SCIENTIFIC" studies as the basis.
Almost sounds like global warming......

So what is the greater concern, greater problem?
That the media is engaged in selling the news, and oh my gosh sensationalizing something?
Or that Doctors are A) using flawed and muddied (dirty bath water) research or is it B) they wasted their money on their degrees and should go back to high school to learn how to conduct research?

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/03/29...earms-injuries