Why does Congress prevent the CDC from studying gun-related violence?

[Maryland Patriot]

as far as the idiotic comment made previously that stated as fact, If you have a gun in the home there will be tragedy, or something to that effect. do the math, find out how many guns are owned in the U.S, then take the number of gun crimes (not counting government crime) and lets see if the actual percentage will in any way support such an ignorant statement.

You know, by that logic, we should never recall a defective product, as only one in a million actually chokes a kid or sends a car off a cliff, right?

look up the definitions of recall and ban.
get back to us when you understand how useless your post was.

 

[2aguy]

as far as the idiotic comment made previously that stated as fact, If you have a gun in the home there will be tragedy, or something to that effect. do the math, find out how many guns are owned in the U.S, then take the number of gun crimes (not counting government crime) and lets see if the actual percentage will in any way support such an ignorant statement.

You know, by that logic, we should never recall a defective product, as only one in a million actually chokes a kid or sends a car off a cliff, right?

Guns that are defective are recalled all the time....one model I have was recalled just before I purchased it.....Springfield Arms ordered the recall on one complaint by one owner and they gathered up all those models and fixed the defect....so again, you have no idea what you are talking about...

 

[Coyote]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

 

[The Rabbi]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

It's actually nothing like cancer research. Not in the least.

 

[Coyote]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

It's actually nothing like cancer research. Not in the least.

Why yes, it is - death by cancer, death by gun violence, death by drunk drivers, death by abortion - you don't decide one is somehow "different" because it's a political sacred cow.

 

[LOki]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

The Center for Disease Control should be spending its time scientifically examining diseases, not crime.

The CDC studies a variety of things that contribute to our health and mortality, not just "disease". They collect data on dog bites, abortions, leading causes of death for various groups, etc. Studying gun deaths is certainly pertinant to their mission. It's scientific fact finding - they don't make policy.

Why are you afraid to this studied? Why must political pressure be brought to bear in order to shut this down?

Gun crime is already thoroughly studied by the FBI & the DOJ.

What special data do you want manufactured reported that hasn't already been provided?

 

[The Rabbi]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

It's actually nothing like cancer research. Not in the least.

Why yes, it is - death by cancer, death by gun violence, death by drunk drivers, death by abortion - you don't decide one is somehow "different" because it's a political sacred cow.

No, idiot. Cancer is a disease. "Gun violence" is not a disease but a phenomenon created by people. As such they arent remotely comparable.
And to continue your analogy people do not die from "gun violence." They die from gunshot wounds to vital organs. And that gets studied all the time.

 

[Coyote]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

It's actually nothing like cancer research. Not in the least.

Why yes, it is - death by cancer, death by gun violence, death by drunk drivers, death by abortion - you don't decide one is somehow "different" because it's a political sacred cow.

No, idiot. Cancer is a disease. "Gun violence" is not a disease but a phenomenon created by people. As such they arent remotely comparable.
And to continue your analogy people do not die from "gun violence." They die from gunshot wounds to vital organs. And that gets studied all the time.

CDC studies more than "disease" - as I said before, their research includes many things that affect public health and mortality: dog bites, abortions, drunk driving, etc.

How many of these are "diseases"? FastStats

What's more pertinant is why should some be POLITICALLY excluded from study?

 

[BULLDOG]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

 

[The Rabbi]

Gonna discover something that wasn't discovered in the wake of WW2 and the Holocaust? Violence has been studied already. Not gonna figure anything out that wasn't figured out generations ago.

Nothing is static - violence, the reasons for it, the reason's behind particular violence are always changing.

That's like saying cancer has been studied already, why continue to study it?

It's actually nothing like cancer research. Not in the least.

Why yes, it is - death by cancer, death by gun violence, death by drunk drivers, death by abortion - you don't decide one is somehow "different" because it's a political sacred cow.

No, idiot. Cancer is a disease. "Gun violence" is not a disease but a phenomenon created by people. As such they arent remotely comparable.
And to continue your analogy people do not die from "gun violence." They die from gunshot wounds to vital organs. And that gets studied all the time.

CDC studies more than "disease" - as I said before, their research includes many things that affect public health and mortality: dog bites, abortions, drunk driving, etc.

How many of these are "diseases"? FastStats

What's more pertinant is why should some be POLITICALLY excluded from study?

OK so you admit your analogy was false. Now you're on to a different argument: that the CDC studies sociological problems with a medical component and this is no different.
But it is different because it is a politically charged matter. And we know pols will take whatever the CDC says people will distort or ignore.
But we've been down this road before and libs didnt like it so they want a do-over.
CDC Gun Research Backfires on Obama - Guns & Ammo

 

[2aguy]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

Well....stop criminals from shooting people.....there...that didn't take any money to study did it?

 

[BULLDOG]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

Well....stop criminals from shooting people.....there...that didn't take any money to study did it?

Great idea. Now we can use your wonderful plan to stop cancer. All we have to do is stop people from getting cancer...........idiot.

 

[2aguy]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

Well....stop criminals from shooting people.....there...that didn't take any money to study did it?

Great idea. Now we can use your wonderful plan to stop cancer. All we have to do is stop people from getting cancer...........idiot.

Since when do criminals cause cancer?

 

[Sonny Clark]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

How can it be stopped? Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. FYI - It's NOT guns, it's people. So, how would it be possible to determine who might go postal, and who might not? The problem is NOT guns, the problem is people. How would you monitor people, and determine which ones are more likely to go postal? How would you stop the domestic violence aspect of it? How would you stop gangs, criminals, and those that without signs or notice, decides to end their life while taking out as many as possible with them?

I'm looking forward to your answers to those questions. And, if you can't answer those questions with doable workable solutions, then you have no point, nor firm ground to base an argument on. Also, even if a study were to be done, and certain areas of violence are founded to be common and widespread, would the study prove to stop gun violence?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Why does Congress prevent the CDC from studying gun-related violence?"

Clearly this is rhetorical.

 

[Sonny Clark]

"Why does Congress prevent the CDC from studying gun-related violence?"

Clearly this is rhetorical.

They prevent it because they know it's a dead end road. It'll just end up to be nothing more than "nice to know information" at best.

 

[ClosedCaption]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

The Center for Disease Control should be spending its time scientifically examining diseases, not crime.

I know there are a lot of other things anyone could be doing but Why should they be blocked from allowing to do the research again?

How are you going to quote my post, then ask the very question that my post answers?

You simply stated they COULD BE doing other things. Which applies to every situation. I'm asking why they should be PREVENTED from conducting the study?

You're a fucking idiot. What I said was clear. Stop trying to fabricate things.

That's true, what you said was very clear. The only problem is that while it was of pristine clarity, it didn't answer my question at all. So, your bad

 

[BULLDOG]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

How can it be stopped? Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. FYI - It's NOT guns, it's people. So, how would it be possible to determine who might go postal, and who might not? The problem is NOT guns, the problem is people. How would you monitor people, and determine which ones are more likely to go postal? How would you stop the domestic violence aspect of it? How would you stop gangs, criminals, and those that without signs or notice, decides to end their life while taking out as many as possible with them?

I'm looking forward to your answers to those questions. And, if you can't answer those questions with doable workable solutions, then you have no point, nor firm ground to base an argument on. Also, even if a study were to be done, and certain areas of violence are founds to be common and widespread, would the study prove to stop gun violence?

I wish I, or anyone else had doable, workable solutions to those problems, but for now no one seems to. That's why the problems need to be studied. If you are willing to just accept the large amounts of unnecessary deaths as "stuff happens" then you are an idiot. The American people have decided that the status quo is not acceptable. The only ones holding up any attempt to improve things are the NRA and their bought and paid for republican politicians, and a few crazy right wingers. Those obstacles will be removed soon.

 

[2aguy]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

How can it be stopped? Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. FYI - It's NOT guns, it's people. So, how would it be possible to determine who might go postal, and who might not? The problem is NOT guns, the problem is people. How would you monitor people, and determine which ones are more likely to go postal? How would you stop the domestic violence aspect of it? How would you stop gangs, criminals, and those that without signs or notice, decides to end their life while taking out as many as possible with them?

I'm looking forward to your answers to those questions. And, if you can't answer those questions with doable workable solutions, then you have no point, nor firm ground to base an argument on. Also, even if a study were to be done, and certain areas of violence are founds to be common and widespread, would the study prove to stop gun violence?

I wish I, or anyone else had doable, workable solutions to those problems, but for now no one seems to. That's why the problems need to be studied. If you are willing to just accept the large amounts of unnecessary deaths as "stuff happens" then you are an idiot. The American people have decided that the status quo is not acceptable. The only ones holding up any attempt to improve things are the NRA and their bought and paid for republican politicians, and a few crazy right wingers. Those obstacles will be removed soon.

There are 8,124 gun murders in the United States in 2014. That is down from the each year previous except for 2012. In 2013, there were 505 accidental gun deaths...again, also going down, not up.

Most of the 8,124 gun murders were criminals killing other criminals, and they were confined to tiny, multi block areas in major cities.

Study poverty, out of wedlock births, teen mother hood, homes with no fathers....those are areas that would reduce gun violence in these communities.

Also study how gun crime is handled by prosecutors and judges...they are not sentencing gun criminals to long prison sentences and too many criminals with gun crime arrests are getting back out in under 3 years and murdering people....

Study those things.

 

[2aguy]

What are they afraid of? Is the CDC barred from scientifically examining any other causes of death? Why this?

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violenc

In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence.

Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

FYI - We can NOT stop gun violence, it's impossible. It doesn't matter how much the horrible crime is studied, nor who studies it, gun violence will continue. There are millions of guns in the hands of the general public, and there's no way to take all the guns away from people. Guns are shipped into this country every single day. People sell guns on the black market, and over the internet.

Anyone that wants a gun can get their hands on a gun. You can NOT legislate guns away, nor will any study prevent gun violence. A study would be a huge waste of money and resources that could be put to better use. We have tried to get rid of illegal drugs, tried to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, and have spent untold $Billions trying to stop world terrorism. Each time, we failed, and failed after we threw money and resources at the problems.

In addition, what real purpose would a study of gun violence serve? Hell, anyone can pick up a daily newspaper and read about gun violence, and that in itself is a study. We already know that gun violence stems from domestic disputes, illegal drug and gang activity, and mostly from mentally disturbed individuals. We also know that gun violence can be attributed to politics, religion, cults, hatred, revenge, jealousy, greed, adultery, alcohol and drug abuse, and many other driving influences.

Personally, I had rather see money spent on beneficial projects and programs where actual results can be seen and felt by this nation and her citizens as a whole. Why not spend funds on infrastructure, education, science, alternative energy, and our needy Vets? Why throw money away on a study that would amount to "nice to know information", but wouldn't solve the problem?

We certainly can't stop gun violence if we don't study it to find out which aspects of it are stoppable. What if we took the same attitude toward cancer?.

How can it be stopped? Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. FYI - It's NOT guns, it's people. So, how would it be possible to determine who might go postal, and who might not? The problem is NOT guns, the problem is people. How would you monitor people, and determine which ones are more likely to go postal? How would you stop the domestic violence aspect of it? How would you stop gangs, criminals, and those that without signs or notice, decides to end their life while taking out as many as possible with them?

I'm looking forward to your answers to those questions. And, if you can't answer those questions with doable workable solutions, then you have no point, nor firm ground to base an argument on. Also, even if a study were to be done, and certain areas of violence are founds to be common and widespread, would the study prove to stop gun violence?

I wish I, or anyone else had doable, workable solutions to those problems, but for now no one seems to. That's why the problems need to be studied. If you are willing to just accept the large amounts of unnecessary deaths as "stuff happens" then you are an idiot. The American people have decided that the status quo is not acceptable. The only ones holding up any attempt to improve things are the NRA and their bought and paid for republican politicians, and a few crazy right wingers. Those obstacles will be removed soon.

When a criminal gets caught using a gun for a crime lock them up for a long time. When a felon is caught with a gun lock them up for a long time.

If they use a gun with more than 10 rounds in it....add time to that sentence.

Notice what each of those things does.......they target people who actually break the law...that is how you stop gun crime...you go after criminals who use guns...

everything else...licensing gun owners, registering guns and universal background checks....target normal gun owners....the peole who aren't shooting other people...

For each law you focus on normal gun owners you are allowing gun criminals to murder people.