Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because they went beyond studying something and were advocating against the second amendment. There is quote from some higher up at the CDC and to paraphrase "We need to do the same thing we guns we did with cigarettes."....
FYI there is nothing preventing the CDC from doing these studies, however they would need to find the money in the existing budget.
Yes, I have seen that also. What about not to be infringed do they not understand? It is government attempting more social engineering in order to control the law abiding.
The NRA is the largest swamp creature in DC. They are embraced by trump and the GOP.
wrong again my friend. just because you might hate and fear guns, doesnt mean everyone else does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1
Another anti (legal) gun thread. How about we focus on the PEOPLE committing the violence? It isn't gun violence, it is people violence. Plus guns aren't a disease, they are an object with neither will, nor intent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
The CDC studies everything under the sun, toaster ovens, swimming poos but god forbid gun deaths.
that may be, but they have no business doing so. they are tasked with studying diseases, not whether a toaster might have flaws in their design. leave that the the UL which IS tasked with such things, and likely do a much better job than the cdc would.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open-D
They are the most important civil rights organization in America
, bar none.
well the ACLU and the ACLJ are up there as well. the difference is that the NRA gets the brunt of the ignorant hateful rantings of the idiot gun grabbers.
The CDC studies everything under the sun, toaster ovens, swimming poos but god forbid gun deaths.
Really?
What's that? A CDC report that says 11,008 homicides via firearms. 461 fatalities by accident with firearms.
What's this?
FBI UCR data showing 11,004 firearm homicides.
What's this?
IIHS report that car accidents are responsible for 37k more deaths than firearm accidents.
What's this?
A number of NICS checks performed from 1998 on through part of 2018.
It is somewhat of an indication of how many firearms were sold. It does not include totals from states that do not perform NICS checks if they have a concealed carry permit. Nor the amount of weapons transferred on a 4473.
Given the above chart compared to your beloved CDC chart and an average of 11,006 homicides committed by firearms, and a total of 461 "accidents" I'd say your priorities are backwards and just want to pizz tax dollars away needlessly, in a nation of 323 million+ with such relatively low numbers for firearm related accidents and homicides.
The landmark study in 1993 showed that bringing a gun into the home puts everyone at much greater risk. “Bringing the gun not only didn’t protect you, it put you at much, much greater risk.”
To this day, gun rights advocates dispute the study’s findings. The N.R.A. pushed Congress in 1995 to stop the C.D.C. from spending taxpayer money on research that advocated gun control. Congress then passed the Dickey Amendment in 1996, and cut funding that effectively ended the C.D.C.’s study of gun violence as a public health issue.
How is gun control a public health issue? Maybe because the unreasonable fear of guns is a mental disease?
the CDC was set up to study diseases, not gun violence, thus they should NEVER have been tasked with the study of gun violence. that should fall under teh perview of the BATF or the FBI.
Here are the results of the CDC's actual study on "gun violence". It turned out rather different from what the gun-rights-haters wanted. See it at: https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1#ix
Now you know why funding was hastily taken away from the CDC after this came out.
-----------------------------------------
CDC Gun Research Backfires on Obama
Kyle Wintersteen August 27th, 2013
In the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, President Obama issued a list of Executive Orders. Notably among them, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was given $10 million to research gun violence.
So, the NRA and Congress took action. But with the ban lifted, what does the CDC’s first major gun research in 17 years reveal? Not exactly what Obama and anti-gun advocates expected. In fact, you might say Obama’s plan backfired.
Here are some key findings from the CDC report, “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” released in June:
1. Armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker:
2. Defensive uses of guns are common: "...more than 3 million per year…"
3. Mass shootings and accidental firearm deaths account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths, and both are declining:
4. “Interventions” (i.e, gun control) such as background checks, so-called assault rifle bans and gun-free zones produce “mixed” results:
5. Gun buyback/turn-in programs are “ineffective” in reducing crime:
6. Stolen guns and retail/gun show purchases account for very little crime:
7. The vast majority of gun-related deaths are not homicides, but suicides:
Why No One Has Heard This
Given the CDC’s prior track record on guns, you may be surprised by the extent with which the new research refutes some of the anti-gun movement’s deepest convictions.
What are opponents of the Second Amendment doing about the new data? Perhaps predictably, they’re ignoring it.
Another anti (legal) gun thread. How about we focus on the PEOPLE committing the violence? It isn't gun violence, it is people violence. Plus guns aren't a disease, they are an object with neither will, nor intent.
The anti gun left really begins to squirm when attention is paid to the people committing the huge percentile of gun crime in the USA.
The demographic trends of those committing these crimes run counter to left's usual narrative.
So the inanimate objects must be the source of the angst, not the people wielding them.
Last edited by snebarekim; 09-03-2018 at 10:10 AM..
In 2013, President 'Pen and Phone' gave the CDC $10 million to study gun violence.
The study is never mentioned by the gun-grabbers because it doesn't support their narrative.
First the NRA did not 'get a ban against the study'. the study was released
Any legislation is the sole territory of legislators. the CDC is not controlled by the NRA.
November 2015........................."The CDC Just Released a ‘Gun Violence’ Study"
I suppose this is where Obama got the confidence to say that the safest places have the most restrictive gun laws. So the streets of Maine and VT and NH are awash in blood while the streets of Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Trenton and Baltimore are sanctuary cities where everyone feels safe.
All based on an academic theory that no guns, equals no gun deaths. Do not confuse academic theory with reality.
Who needs a study by the CDC re gun violence. Gun violence is not equally distributed across cities, states and nation as anti gun advocates suggest. There are major hints and clues as to predictability of when and where the violence will occur and who is committing the violence. What is lacking is the intelligence and effort to address the problems by legislators and voters who advocate for ineffective laws that exempt those who do the killing.
Lives willingly sacrificed today for the future achievement of the theoretical goal of, no guns, no gun deaths, so far in the distant future it becomes a fantasy.
A study by the CDC is irrelevant. Given the hierarchical coding system where categorical bias is easily accomplished, coupled with creative statistical analysis.....the final outcome dictated by the Obama administration is written into the pre study analysis plan. Why talk about NRA influence while ignoring Obama policy influence?
Because they went beyond studying something and were advocating against the second amendment. There is quote from some higher up at the CDC and to paraphrase "We need to do the same thing we guns we did with cigarettes."....
FYI there is nothing preventing the CDC from doing these studies, however they would need to find the money in the existing budget.
I dont understand that comment, I realize they did studies and found cigarettes to be deadly and dangerous, but other than that, NOTHING changed, anyone 18 and over can go into just about any store and buy as much as they like, so basically no restrictions on access were imposed, even though they were found to be deadly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
