Gun control complaints are appalling

Re Regulator dismisses gun lobby’s complaints against surgeon, March 14 As a longtime public member of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), I read this article with much interest. I served as a public member (non-physician) of CPSO for many years, effectively resigning on Dec. 31, 2018. Having witnessed this first hand and seeing the benefits of it, I fully agree that physician advocacy is an important function that doctors fulfil on the public’s behalf. Without this advocacy, many members of the public would be left out in the dark, being deprived of key information on health care and health care concerns/issues.

The sad reality is that the college, by law, must address all complaints, whether frivolous or vexatious. This entails using costly resources, including staff time. Gun control is a public health concern/issue and must be treated as such. Anything less flies in the face of public health and injury prevention. Emile Therien, Ottawa I was appalled by the more than 70 gun lobby members who filed a complaint to the College of Physicians and Surgeons against Dr. Najma Ahmed simply because she is in favour of stricter gun regulations. She saves the lives of people who are the victims of guns, while their actions are responsible for a significant number of deaths.

The irrational people in the gun lobby don’t understand that it is far more likely for a family member or friend than an intruder to be killed by a gun in a home in which there is a gun.

I don’t want to live in a society like the Southern U.S., in which people are free to carry guns in public or own assault weapons. I lived in the South for a time and my neighbour, who was very proud that he used guns safely, shot his own house by accident; guns are intrinsically dangerous. The actions of the gun lobby tell me that we need to do more to support stricter gun regulations because the people in the gun lobby are very vocal and dangerous.