Gun control is not clinically relevant

As I value the liberties that we enjoy in this country, including freedom of the press, I was not offended by Dr. Susman’s recent editorial (“Locked, loaded—and lethal,” J Fam Pract. 2011;60:63). I was, however, unimpressed with the decision to use this venue to share a very personal viewpoint on a topic that is far from clinically relevant. Indeed, the topic is political fodder when framed in the half-truth context in which it was presented. The attacks Dr. Susman referred to were truly deplorable, but their use in his editorial can best be described as literary manipulation in order to arouse emotions in support of his argument.

I, too, agree that the common American has no need for a fully automatic weapon; however, that does not mean we need a law banning its possession.

Furthermore, I agree with Dr. Susman’s astute observation of violent subliminal messages in the rhetoric of politics. He would be equally bound by some code of editorial honesty, I would hope, to address any number of equally or more troubling violent themes and messages, such as those found in video games for preteens.

The Second Amendment has a deep and meaningful history. Rather than trivializing a part of our Constitution and marginalizing the National Rifle Association, elected congressmen, and Sarah Palin, Dr. Susman might serve readers better by refraining from his own political rhetoric.

Adam Soto, MD
Savannah, Ga

My comments are apolitical. Further, I share the heartbreak that we felt for the victims of the shooting in Tucson (as well as all the other senseless shootings).

But we are inundated with the points of view of the left and the right in every media outlet known to man. Heretofore, I could escape from that for a while by sitting down with The Journal of Family Practice and reading articles that interested me and made me a better family physician. I did not have to be subjected to attacks on politicians, their positions, and the social issue du jour. Alas, Dr. Susman has ruined that!

I realize that what he wrote is an editorial, therefore an opinion piece. However, the editorials in this educational journal should relate to issues involving the everyday practice of family medicine. Please spare me the “gun control is such an issue” argument, because it is not. Regardless of one’s position, gun control is a social issue that has never come up in the day-to-day care of patients in my practice of 30 years.

Please save this type of editorial for other more appropriate forums. Publishing Dr. Susman’s rant, I believe, has done an injustice to the integrity of the journal.

Jack D. Butterfield Jr, MD
Roseville, Ohio