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

[TemplarKormac]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, my article far from makes your point. You're guilty of trying to spin the issue.

 

[HappyJoy]

Should gun violence be studied, if so, who? If not, why not?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I wonder why neither Clinton or Obama had any objections to this? Clinton could have vetoed it any time he wanted to, same with Obama. And you're going to blame this on Congress?

Holy Toledo.

 

[HappyJoy]

I wonder why neither Clinton or Obama had any objections to this? Clinton could have vetoed it any time he wanted to, same with Obama. And you're going to blame this on Congress?

Holy Toledo.

Who do you think should study gun violence?

 

[TemplarKormac]

By the way:

"A forthcoming study by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, estimates that CDC funding for such research was cut to $100,000 a year in 2009-2012 from an average of $2.5 million, in current dollars, in 1992-1996."

NRA Blocking Vital Gun Violence Research, Scientists Tell Biden

Even a gun control group knows who to blame for the cut in funding. Clinton and Obama let it happen, despite their views on gun control.

 

[Coyote]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

Congress refuses to fund CDC research into gun violence = CDC self imposes ban?

Research can't occur without funding.

 

[Coyote]

By the way:

"A forthcoming study by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, estimates that CDC funding for such research was cut to $100,000 a year in 2009-2012 from an average of $2.5 million, in current dollars, in 1992-1996."

NRA Blocking Vital Gun Violence Research, Scientists Tell Biden

Even a gun control group knows who to blame for the cut in funding. Clinton and Obama let it happen, despite their views on gun control.

NRA.

 

[HappyJoy]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

Congress refuses to fund CDC research into gun violence = CDC self imposes ban?

Research can't occur without funding.

Where should the money come from?

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

Congress refuses to fund CDC research into gun violence = CDC self imposes ban?

Research can't occur without funding.

"the CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source"

Doesn't get any clearer than that. That means you're lying.

 

[Coyote]

I wonder why neither Clinton or Obama had any objections to this? Clinton could have vetoed it any time he wanted to, same with Obama. And you're going to blame this on Congress?

Holy Toledo.

I actually don't care.

At this point - it's Congress that is refusing to fund that research (read the OP please). Everyone is running with the blame game to avoid addressing the REAL issue -- why do they want to prevent this research?

 

[TemplarKormac]

By the way:

"A forthcoming study by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, estimates that CDC funding for such research was cut to $100,000 a year in 2009-2012 from an average of $2.5 million, in current dollars, in 1992-1996."

NRA Blocking Vital Gun Violence Research, Scientists Tell Biden

Even a gun control group knows who to blame for the cut in funding. Clinton and Obama let it happen, despite their views on gun control.

NRA.

The NRA doesn't pass funding bills, Congress does. The NRA didn't stop Clinton from signing the Brady Bill, did it? The NRA won't stop Obama from issuing any executive orders regarding gun control, will they? Obama has had a chance to propose budget increases for the CDC to conduct this research, but alas, not so far.

You attribute to the NRA more power than they actually have.

 

[Coyote]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

Congress refuses to fund CDC research into gun violence = CDC self imposes ban?

Research can't occur without funding.

"the CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source"

Doesn't get any clearer than that. That means you're lying.

Read my OP which was of a far more recent vintage - in particular, the part about Congress extending the ban on gun violence research.

 

[Coyote]

By the way:

"A forthcoming study by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, estimates that CDC funding for such research was cut to $100,000 a year in 2009-2012 from an average of $2.5 million, in current dollars, in 1992-1996."

NRA Blocking Vital Gun Violence Research, Scientists Tell Biden

Even a gun control group knows who to blame for the cut in funding. Clinton and Obama let it happen, despite their views on gun control.

NRA.

The NRA doesn't pass funding bills, Congress does. The NRA didn't stop Clinton from signing the Brady Bill, did it? The NRA won't stop Obama from issuing any executive orders regarding gun control, will they? Obama has had a chance to propose budget increases for the CDC to conduct this research, but alas, not so far.

You attribute to the NRA more power than they actually have.

Please. Don't insult my intelligence. The NRA is a lobby group - like many - with considerable power.

 

[Care4all]

Their NRA masters told them to.

Wrong. More like the pharmaceutical companies don't want people to know that all these mass shooting are related to Zoloft or Prozac.

hmmmm.....maybe you got something there...hadn't thought of that.... a good guess though!

 

[blackhawk]

If you wanted a study on gun related violence done wouldn't having it done by those in law enforcement or in the mental health profession be a better choice? It seems like that would be more up their alley than the CDC.

 

[TemplarKormac]

At this point - it's Congress that is refusing to fund that research (read the OP please).

And its Obama signing those bills into law. It's not the NRA's fault. Obama can veto those bills anytime he wants.

The NRA is a lobby group - like many - with considerable power.

Ha. And don't you dare insult my intelligence. The President is capable of acting while ignoring the pressure from lobbyists. But he doesn't despite his positions on gun control.

Everyone is running with the blame game to avoid addressing the REAL issue -- why do they want to prevent this research?

No, the power of the veto could have changed this from the getgo. But hey, it's always the NRA's fault isn't it? Surely Obama and Clinton weren't so deathly scared of the NRA as to dare not veto any funding cuts for this research?

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, given the link posted above, Coyote, that destroys your entire case. They have the ability but not the funding, and Obama hasn't been helping. He proposed cutting funding himself. If you want links I can give you more.

No, it really doesn't "destroy" the case but rather confirms it - from your source:

Fear and funding shortfalls remain at the CDC, even though the agency was ordered to resume firearm studies after Newtown shooting.

Two years ago this week, President Obama ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get back to studying “the causes of gun violence.”


The CDC had not touched firearm research since 1996 — when the NRA accused the agency of promoting gun control and Congress threatened to strip the agency’s funding. The CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source and had a chilling effect felt far beyond the agency: Almost no one wanted to pay for gun violence studies, researchers say. Young academics were warned that joining the field was a good way to kill their careers. And the odd gun study that got published went through linguistic gymnastics to hide any connection to firearms.

....But today the CDC still avoids gun-violence research, demonstrating what many see as the depth of its fear about returning to one of the country’s most divisive debates. The agency recently was asked by The Washington Post why it was still sitting on the sidelines of firearms studies. It declined to make an official available for an interview but responded with a statement noting it had commissioned an agenda of possible research goals but still lacked the dedicated funding to pursue it.​

Your article makes my point - without funding, which Congress controls, they can't conduct research.

Yet Obama continues signing these cuts into law. Cuts have been happening since Bush left office. Whoops. Oh yeah, and the ban on research was self imposed by the CDC not Congress.

Congress refuses to fund CDC research into gun violence = CDC self imposes ban?

Research can't occur without funding.

"the CDC’s self-imposed ban dried up a powerful funding source"

Doesn't get any clearer than that. That means you're lying.

Read my OP which was of a far more recent vintage - in particular, the part about Congress extending the ban on gun violence research.

No, because your OP is lying. You leave out the fact that two Democratic presidents in the past, oh, 20 or so years chose not to veto these bills. Neither of them proposed increasing funding in that area when given the opportunity. But it's the NRA's fault.

I don't know how much more disingenuous you can get.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I actually don't care.

Of course, which explains why you left out important details on the matter.

I'm enjoying this game of political pinball, but I must eat.

Later.

 

[Weatherman2020]

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.

What's the D stand for in CDC?

Leftards are soooooo stupid.