CDC and the NRA.

[Ratboy]

The antis' really like to bring up the CDC when trying to make a point about gun control. Of course they all talk about the "gutting" of the funding by the NRA run congress (?!) of 15 years ago.

I'm curious what they think the point of throwing a bunch of money at the CDC to conduct firearm research would accomplish? Besides taking money away from disease research, etc?

When I go through the CDC site it pretty clearly lists the deaths by gun or other means along with other information.

When I look at the FBI stats I get more information.

Do I think the numbers could be broken down further? Of course and I'd like to see that.

My question I suppose is what would an appropriate response be to this CDC comment be?

[Wang Lung]

It is my understanding, the NRA has absolutely no problem with CDC doing gun research. However. About 20 years ago, they were using their taxpayer funded research to slander gun ownership. The NRA put a stop to it.

[philobeddoe]

firearms are not a disease

less government please



____________
ΜΟ;ΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ;

[RonnieP]

Yeah, all we need is another tax on gun ownership to fund "research" by the CDC.

[Fatgunman]

The left-wingers want this because the CDC probably includes suicides and accidents in addition to murders making gun related deaths figures look higher therefore giving more weight to their anti-freedom arguments. Other than that I don't see any reason for it at all.

[CrazyPhuD]

To the people promoting gun control it's advantageous for the CDC to conduct studies. Why? Doctors for the most part are inherently biased against firearms.

Really it's not hard to see why, they are often the ones cleaning up for all of the after effects of criminal shootings. If all you see is the negative of something and you never see the positive you're going to think of it in a negative light.

Think about it, how many ER docs would support people owning cars if they never used one and didn't know people who did? If all you ever see is the harm your view will be negative.

That's why the implied bias of most of the medical community/journals, etc is going to be pro gun control. That doesn't mean they can't do solid research, but it's more likely they will do slanted research even if only unconsciously.

On the flip side, you expect people like the CDC to be pro gun control. When they present a study that says gun control doesn't work, that adds credibility to the result because you would expect them to be biased towards the opposite conclusion. This is what makes a study like this more powerful.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

[zhyla]

The NRA (and a lot of gun owners) are paranoid about the results of CDC studies not putting gun ownership in a good light. I personally think violent and accidental deaths are a valid thing for the CDC (or maybe the Consumer Product Commission) to be studying. You can ***** about big government all you want but things like vaccines and fences around swimming pools are a benefit to all of us.

[Drew Eckhardt]

I'm curious what they think the point of throwing a bunch of money at the CDC to conduct firearm research would accomplish?

The researchers will come to the conclusions their elected and appointed political masters guide them to. For instance they might find that a disproportionate fraction of the people shot own guns but neglect to look at the causal factor of most victims being criminals.

That will be justification for new laws or regulations. Most of the people shot being gun owners may become permission for health insurers to charge us more the same way smokers pay higher premiums.

[Ratboy]

Thanks!

zhyla- yes, vaccines are good and a fence around a pool is helpful to keep some kids out... but I don't see how that has anything to do with the CDC "studying" firearm related violence.

What are they going to discover? That guns are dangerous tools?

[bussda]

To understand the CDC v. NRA, read up on Arthur Kellerman, New England Journal of Medicine, and Garen Wintemute.

People trusted doctors, once. But then some doctors used pseudoscience and said trust me, I'm a doctor. And their claims are not provable.

That is the crux of the matter.

[chuckdc]

Back when the CDC was stripped of being able to do gun-related research, it was done because the "studies" they were publishing were an absolute crock with scientific flaws you could drive the USS Nimitz through. They were also publishing opinion pieces that were backed by no research other than the personal opinions of some highly politicized and profoundly anti-gun "scientists". That's why they got wee-wee slapped and had their toys taken away.

[IVC]

The NRA (and a lot of gun owners) are paranoid about the results of CDC studies not putting gun ownership in a good light. I personally think violent and accidental deaths are a valid thing for the CDC (or maybe the Consumer Product Commission) to be studying. You can ***** about big government all you want but things like vaccines and fences around swimming pools are a benefit to all of us.

Reporting correlation is not research to begin with. Reporting correlation in order to advance an agenda is advocacy.

The benefits you suggest come from proper research, where we put fences around pools to protect children, not have CDC call for a ban on "assault pools," classification of all pools as "public nuisance," holding water districts liable for drownings in a pool, etc.

NRA has heavy focus on gun safety, especially with children. CDC wants to pin criminal gun use on all gun owners and push the anti gun agenda. Big difference.

[speedrrracer]

The NRA (and a lot of gun owners) are paranoid about the results of CDC studies not putting gun ownership in a good light. I personally think violent and accidental deaths are a valid thing for the CDC (or maybe the Consumer Product Commission) to be studying. You can ***** about big government all you want but things like vaccines and fences around swimming pools are a benefit to all of us.

I think you have lost your way. Disease has no relationship to firearms. Center for Disease Control, get it?

Omnipotent, oversized government and psuedo-government entities are the problem.

[disintelligentsia]

The reason why the NRA lobbied against the CDC doing "research" on firearms is because the director of the CDC explicitly came out and said the research was intended for propaganda.

Dr. Mark Rosenberg, who was then director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC, explained his aim was to make the public see firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (Quoted in William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” The Washington Post, Oct. 19, 1994.)

A newspaper article on two other leading anti-gun propagandists, Dr. Katherine Christoffel and Dr. Robert Tanz of the Children’s Hospital in Chicago, explained their “plan to do to handguns what their profession has done to cigarettes … turn gun ownership from a personal-choice issue to a repulsive, anti-social health hazard.” (Harold Henderson, “Policy: Guns ‘n Poses,” Chicago Reader, Dec. 16, 1994.)

see more here:http://www.nrapublications.org/index...ize-your-guns/

[Ratboy]

Now that is interesting. Thank you!