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

[Clementine]

Congress has been denying funding for CDC to study gun violence since 1996. This isn't new. Are you liberals that far behind in the news that you are bitching about shit that hasn't changed in nearly 20 years? First, one idiot is bringing up head start, as if Obama invented it, then we have this debate on an old law preventing the CDC from being funded for this type of study.

A few libs think buying guns automatically makes people want to kill for no reason. They could look closely at available statistics and see that the vast majority of legal gun owners have never shot anyone, even in self-defense. Meanwhile, the gangs live and die by guns. I doubt if those who are responsible for killing people would be willing to take part in some study to figure out why they did it.

The big problem is people who don't care about the law and are violent by nature. Maybe they could focus on why so many people are being raised to disrespect society. The top five most dangerous cities are predominantly black. I'd like someone to study that and find out why we have so many angry people with no respect for life.

The liberals would like to try and prove that guns turn normal people into potential maniacs. Any study can be interpreted in several ways and the people doing the work often begin their study with foregone conclusion and will make sure they get their desired outcome.

We have so many illnesses, especially with all the illegal immigration and refugees, so I would think the CDC would be busier sticking to their original purpose before getting involved in the gun control debate. This is coming up again now because the left is desperately trying to find reason to further their agenda.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-still-cant-study-causes-gun-violence-180955884/?no-ist

 

[thereisnospoon]

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 CDC? Please.

 

[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.

What's the D stand for in CDC?

Leftards are soooooo stupid.

And I bet you believe the People's Democratic Republic of Korea is really Democratic too.

 

[Coyote]

Congress has been denying funding for CDC to study gun violence since 1996. This isn't new. Are you liberals that far behind in the news that you are bitching about shit that hasn't changed in nearly 20 years? First, one idiot is bringing up head start, as if Obama invented it, then we have this debate on an old law preventing the CDC from being funded for this type of study.

A few libs think buying guns automatically makes people want to kill for no reason. They could look closely at available statistics and see that the vast majority of legal gun owners have never shot anyone, even in self-defense. Meanwhile, the gangs live and die by guns. I doubt if those who are responsible for killing people would be willing to take part in some study to figure out why they did it.

The big problem is people who don't care about the law and are violent by nature. Maybe they could focus on why so many people are being raised to disrespect society. The top five most dangerous cities are predominantly black. I'd like someone to study that and find out why we have so many angry people with no respect for life.

The liberals would like to try and prove that guns turn normal people into potential maniacs. Any study can be interpreted in several ways and the people doing the work often begin their study with foregone conclusion and will make sure they get their desired outcome.

We have so many illnesses, especially with all the illegal immigration and refugees, so I would think the CDC would be busier sticking to their original purpose before getting involved in the gun control debate. This is coming up again now because the left is desperately trying to find reason to further their agenda.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-still-cant-study-causes-gun-violence-180955884/?no-ist

So why are you afraid to let the CDC study gun related mortality?

 

[Coyote]

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.

Why not let CDC study it? They study a variety of public health and safety issues. Why specifically ban them from studying it?

 

[Nosmo King]

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.

This imagines that the only gunshot victims were involved as either perpetrator or victim of crime. Are here other ways a gunshot might happen?

 

[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.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

It's already been done. Seems like a smart person like you would know that. LMAO

CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
08/21/2013 06:43 PM ET
The White House asked the Centers for Disease Control "to research the causes and prevention of gun violence." We're pretty sure that what the CDC found wasn't what the White House was looking for.
<snip>
What that study revealed, though, does not fit in with the media-Democrat message.

"Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals," says the report, which was completed in June and ignored in the mainstream press.

The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted

So what are you bitching about again?

 

[Auld Phart]

Repatitiuos,how

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?

What is wrong with gathering scientific data on gun violence? If you don't have actual data then how can you form intelligent policies to address it? Research is neutral - it's what you do with it, that has partisan ramifications.

How many major universities have already done the work repeatedly? Harvard did a rather in depth look,must be many more.

So the CDC can't? Why?

How many universities have done research on sexually transmitted diseases? Drunk driving? Shark attacks? Should the CDC be banned from studying those?

How many universities have done research on sexually transmitted diseases?

STDs?
For a cure. Self explanatory

Drunk driving?

Alcoholism is disease

Shark attacks

research on why sharks attack?
Its their nature.

 

[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.

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?

And what purpose would it serve other than "nice to know information"? Please explain. Thanks.

It might serve a purpose in providing knowledge - and with knowledge, comes rational decision making.

Why do you think research into this should be shut down? You avoided that question. Please explain. Thanks.

I'm NOT avoiding the question. I have answered the question several times already. Try reading comprehension, please. I will answer it one more time for your benefit. ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: It would be a waste of money and resources. EXPLANATION: Please read everyone of my comments to the root thread ( article ). I have explained in detail already, at least twice. Again, try reading comprehension. Thanks.

 

[SwimExpert]

This imagines that the only gunshot victims were involved as either perpetrator or victim of crime.

It's not imagining anything. The OP clearly indicates that the subject matter is gun violence. Thus, the OP frames the subject specifically to crime.

 

[SwimExpert]

Why are you afraid to this studied?

That's a straw man. I never said I was afraid of it being studied.

Ok, let me rephrase that - what are people so afraid of that they are using politicians to prevent research into this?

Rephrasing the same straw many argument does not make it any less a straw man argument.

 

[SwimExpert]

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.

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.

 

[Seawytch]

The OP's questions was rhetorical, yes?

 

[JoeB131]

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

Well, that's a relief. you see, I thought it was after Kellerman determined that a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, the gun industry shit their pants and didn't want any more study of the issue.

But since you think that the CDC shouldn't be studying how many Americans are killed and injured by guns every year (even though they do study such as occupational injury and injuries to old people in nursing homes), which agency do you think should study it.

More importantly, why are you gun nuts so afraid of the subject actually being studied?

 

[JoeB131]

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.

Except that Austrailia, the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Italy have done EXACTLY THAT.

So gun violence cannot be stopped except for those countries who have actually made an effort to actually stop it.

 

[SwimExpert]

More importantly, why are you gun nuts so afraid of the subject actually being studied?

Why do you morons keep repeating this same straw man?

 

[Sonny Clark]

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.

Except that Austrailia, the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Italy have done EXACTLY THAT.

So gun violence cannot be stopped except for those countries who have actually made an effort to actually stop it.

It'll never work here. We have too many gangs, crazies, and millions of weapons in the hands of the general public. Bad guys are not going to turn in their guns. Gun collectors are not going to turn in their guns. Hunters are not going to turn in their guns. Competition shooters are not going to turn in their guns. It's impossible to collect all the guns, and leave everyone unarmed. If you know of a way, please tell us how it can be done. Thanks.

 

[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.

Why not let CDC study it? They study a variety of public health and safety issues. Why specifically ban them from studying it?

Because gun violence is generally due to either social, economic, or mental problems not really something the CDC covers.

 

[Nosmo King]

This imagines that the only gunshot victims were involved as either perpetrator or victim of crime.

It's not imagining anything. The OP clearly indicates that the subject matter is gun violence. Thus, the OP frames the subject specifically to crime.

Suicides, accidental gun deaths, children with irresponsibly easy access to guns are not gun violence? They are not necessarily crimes, but gun shot is always violent.