Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If we're going to wring our hands and gnash our teeth over the statistically insignificant number of people killed by guns compared to the number of gun owners in this nation, we need to really take on the epidemic of medical murders.
Someone needs to stand up to the AMA! Doctor control now!
If we're going to wring our hands and gnash our teeth over the statistically insignificant number of people killed by guns compared to the number of gun owners in this nation, we need to really take on the epidemic of medical murders.
Someone needs to stand up to the AMA! Doctor control now!
When guns kill the same numbers are avoidable medical mistakes, then that will be statistically significant.
400,000 a year, or a mere 12 times the number of gun deaths. Deaths by medical mistakes hit records
Here is a piece by one of the people who testified against allowing the CDC to attack gun ownership with shoddy research and propaganda disguised as research....
Why Congress stopped gun control activism at the CDC
I was one of three medical doctors who testified before the House’s Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on March 6, 1996 about the CDC’s misdeeds. (Note: This testimony and related events are described in my three-part documented historical series). Here is what we showed the committee:
Kellermann and his colleagues used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. In the article Kellermann admitted that “a majority of the homicides (50.9 percent) occurred in the context of a quarrel or a romantic triangle.” Still another 30 percent “were related to drug dealing” or “occurred during the commission of another felony, such as a robbery, rape, or burglary.”
- Dr. Arthur Kellermann’s1993 New England Journal of Medicine article that launched his career as a rock star gun control advocate and gave rise to the much-repeated “three times” fallacy. His research was supported by two CDC grants.
In summary, the CDC funded a flawed study of crime-prone inner city residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical American gun owners. The committee members were not amused.
“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) Dr. O’Carroll later said he had been misquoted.
- The Winter 1993 CDC official publication, Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence, coauthored by CDC official Dr. Mark Rosenberg. This taxpayer-funded gun control polemic offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries—“restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”
- The brazen public comments of top CDC officials, made at a time when gun prohibitionists were much more candid about their political goals.
But his successor Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the Washington Post as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” Washington Post, October 19, 1994.
- CDC Grant #R49/CCR903697-06 to the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco gun control advocacy group, supporting a newsletter that frankly advocated gun control.
C
And gun control worked like a charm…not one of those law abiding, normal people had a gun in the gun free zone……congratulations on the success of your law….
Please tell us your proposed law that would have prevented these two shooters from obtaining weapons.
Please tell us your proposed law that would have prevented these two shooters from obtaining weapons.
Real Background checks. If you try to get a gun, we call your workplace and ask, "Hey, is it cool if this guy gets a gun?"
I'm betting his coworkers would have said "No" even before they shot them.
Again, we know everything there is to know about Sayed Farook and his wife within 24 hours of the incident. We know who they were talking to on social media, we'd know their travel plans.
We know that they were talking to people on the terror watch list. You know, the terror watch list that is not a obstacle to people buying guns because the NRA demanded that carve out.
Here is a piece by one of the people who testified against allowing the CDC to attack gun ownership with shoddy research and propaganda disguised as research....
Why Congress stopped gun control activism at the CDC
I was one of three medical doctors who testified before the House’s Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on March 6, 1996 about the CDC’s misdeeds. (Note: This testimony and related events are described in my three-part documented historical series). Here is what we showed the committee:
Kellermann and his colleagues used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. In the article Kellermann admitted that “a majority of the homicides (50.9 percent) occurred in the context of a quarrel or a romantic triangle.” Still another 30 percent “were related to drug dealing” or “occurred during the commission of another felony, such as a robbery, rape, or burglary.”
- Dr. Arthur Kellermann’s1993 New England Journal of Medicine article that launched his career as a rock star gun control advocate and gave rise to the much-repeated “three times” fallacy. His research was supported by two CDC grants.
In summary, the CDC funded a flawed study of crime-prone inner city residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical American gun owners. The committee members were not amused.
“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) Dr. O’Carroll later said he had been misquoted.
- The Winter 1993 CDC official publication, Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence, coauthored by CDC official Dr. Mark Rosenberg. This taxpayer-funded gun control polemic offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries—“restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”
- The brazen public comments of top CDC officials, made at a time when gun prohibitionists were much more candid about their political goals.
But his successor Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the Washington Post as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” Washington Post, October 19, 1994.
- CDC Grant #R49/CCR903697-06 to the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco gun control advocacy group, supporting a newsletter that frankly advocated gun control.
This would be valid if they were for ANY STUDY AT ALL.
But since they are against studying it at all you have to consider that the CDC isnt the problem. Some people are against any study or guns period like the OP.
Wrong…the Department of Justice and the FBI study guns all day long…….and they get funding for it too….
yeah but do they study gun violence? And if so, tell me the answer that I already know to this question:
Do you accept or reject their findings?
Please tell us your proposed law that would have prevented these two shooters from obtaining weapons.
Real Background checks. If you try to get a gun, we call your workplace and ask, "Hey, is it cool if this guy gets a gun?"
I'm betting his coworkers would have said "No" even before they shot them.
Again, we know everything there is to know about Sayed Farook and his wife within 24 hours of the incident. We know who they were talking to on social media, we'd know their travel plans.
We know that they were talking to people on the terror watch list. You know, the terror watch list that is not a obstacle to people buying guns because the NRA demanded that carve out.
Here is the link to the 3 part history of how gun control activists have used health care advocacy to propagandize against gun ownership......
You mean 33,000 deaths and 70,000 injuries aren't a major health concern?
We ban products for a lot less.
"but, but, b ut... Founding Slave Rapists!!!!"
Physician mistakes kill about 400,000 a year. For every one killed by a gun, 12 die because of doctors and hospitals.
Should doctors be illegal?
Deaths by medical mistakes hit records
Right! And theres nothing we can do to prevent it!
If we're going to wring our hands and gnash our teeth over the statistically insignificant number of people killed by guns compared to the number of gun owners in this nation, we need to really take on the epidemic of medical murders.
Someone needs to stand up to the AMA! Doctor control now!
That would be fine if there was a such thing as a "statiscally SIGNIFICANT number of people killed by guns". But everytime someone is asked they dont know what a significant number would be.
Is it a secret?
Here is a piece by one of the people who testified against allowing the CDC to attack gun ownership with shoddy research and propaganda disguised as research....
Why Congress stopped gun control activism at the CDC
I was one of three medical doctors who testified before the House’s Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on March 6, 1996 about the CDC’s misdeeds. (Note: This testimony and related events are described in my three-part documented historical series). Here is what we showed the committee:
Kellermann and his colleagues used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. In the article Kellermann admitted that “a majority of the homicides (50.9 percent) occurred in the context of a quarrel or a romantic triangle.” Still another 30 percent “were related to drug dealing” or “occurred during the commission of another felony, such as a robbery, rape, or burglary.”
- Dr. Arthur Kellermann’s1993 New England Journal of Medicine article that launched his career as a rock star gun control advocate and gave rise to the much-repeated “three times” fallacy. His research was supported by two CDC grants.
In summary, the CDC funded a flawed study of crime-prone inner city residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical American gun owners. The committee members were not amused.
“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) Dr. O’Carroll later said he had been misquoted.
- The Winter 1993 CDC official publication, Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence, coauthored by CDC official Dr. Mark Rosenberg. This taxpayer-funded gun control polemic offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries—“restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”
- The brazen public comments of top CDC officials, made at a time when gun prohibitionists were much more candid about their political goals.
But his successor Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the Washington Post as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” Washington Post, October 19, 1994.
- CDC Grant #R49/CCR903697-06 to the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco gun control advocacy group, supporting a newsletter that frankly advocated gun control.
You mean why the CDC was prevented from even keeping records of gun violence- or investigating gun violence?
Well the answer is that the NRA told Congress to prevent them from doing that, and Congress sat up and begged for more NRA treats.
I know you don't want Kellerman to be real... but how about doing an ACTUAL gun study and record every gun death.
Every suicide. (19500)
Every accident (800)
Every murder (11,000)
Every justifiable homicide (200).
Yeah, Kellerman probably had it about right.
suicide....Japan, Soth Korea, and China all have 2x the suicide rates and zero access to guns and in the United States we have 19,000 people who commit suicide without a gun....
accidental gun deaths in 2013 from the CDC....505....with over 320 million guns in private hands and over 13 million people carrying guns....and the accidental death rate is going down, not up...
Gun murders according to the FBI table 8....8,124, the majority of which are violent career criminals murdering other career criminals, with illegally possessed guns. and this rate is going down, not up.
and with over 320 million guns in private hands, and 13 million people carrying guns each year there are 1.5 million defensive gun uses according to a study commissioned by Bill Clinton through his department of justice....
And in those uses...criminals are only dumb enough to press their attack about 260 times where they have to be shot and killed....since normal gun owners do not want to shoot anyone...
And congratulations to you for your argument that guns need to be freely available for self-defence...except for the inconvenient fact that that means they're also freely available to murderous lunatics.Wow....this is fun......
You declare a public space a gun free zone......and people are murdered by a mass shooter with a gun........you go to prison......right?
No, you gun nuts are the problem. When you make it easy for the two nuts yesterday to get guns, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
Not the fact that we didn't have heavily armed retards at this school yesterday.
California has all the gun control laws that you guys want…magazine limits…..assault weapon bans….limits on the type of hand guns you can have….background checks…..everything….and these people passed all of them….
Except one….
only the law abiding people obeyed the law on not bringing guns into gun free zones…..all of the people at that party obeyed the gun free zone laws……except for the mass shooters….they broke that law…….
And gun control worked like a charm…not one of those law abiding, normal people had a gun in the gun free zone……congratulations on the success of your law….
[
So you have no problem removing someone's inherent rights without due process.
Nice to know comrade.
