aley, other AGs demand CDC study on gun violence

[2aguy]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

I don't think a potentially life saving study is a waste.

Healey’s letter points out that more than 33,000 people die from guns every year in the United States. Among the areas that need to be studied, she said, are the effectiveness of gun storage methods, intervention by health care professionals, and the psychology of gun violence.

And that is a lie.......

357,000,000 million guns in private hands in 2014.......

21,000 by gun suicide.

(19,974 non gun suicides)

gun murder in 2014 8,124

Accidental gun deaths, 586

So......that is all the research we need......and the CDC already counts bodies......

 

[2aguy]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

 

[Brain357]

We should be studying gun violence.

Healey, other AGs call for CDC study of gun violence - The Boston Globe

President Obama, Senator Edward J. Markey, and other Democrats have pushed for years to lift the restriction, saying it has effectively squelched almost all CDC research into firearm deaths and injuries.

The original sponsor of the amendment, Jay Dickey, a former Republican congressman from Arkansas, has also said he regrets the measure.

They were never stopped from studying gun violence...they just aren't allowed to be activists against the 2nd Amendment on the taxpayer dime...but nice lie.....

Yes all the sane people are just lying.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

and who are those people that are dying by guns? suicidal people and criminals.

Victims of criminals. Victims of accidents.

victims of criminals? Are you fuckin kidding me right now? lol

You think criminals are only ones shot?

no, but do you think a lack of guns would heavily influence non-gun crime rates?
The ONLY way gun control would work is if the the WORLD banned guns. Untill then, the crimianls will still have weapons. We have a HUGE black market for weaponry.
ATTENTION : Those people are not lawful gun owners.
This is why I called it a waste. Because that is EXACTLY what it is.

Then the studies would determine that. Gun control is effective however in some forms. Lots of felons have been caught with guns and arrested before killing someone.

The PROBLEM is the CDC is not an honest broker, they were shut down because they were DISHONEST in the method and reason they did studies. There is NO REASON to believe they have changed.

 

[2aguy]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Did you realize that the CDC is already allowed to do gun research as to causes.....and has been doing it.....here...from the New York Times....not a right wing or pro gun source.....

If the CDC is not allowed to study gun violence....how did they do this research....you are being lied to by the anti gun politicians...and their useful idiot allies.....



This is from 2015.......


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/25/us/cdc-gun-violence-wilmington.html?_r=0



When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.

They were here to examine gun violence.

This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------

The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.

“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,” the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”

Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.

 

[OldLady]

Last four surgeons general call on CDC to resume gun violence studies

And they don't know what they are talking about.......typical government drones....

Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

And the truth.........

CDC Leaders Admit They Want to Ban Guns

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, the CDC was openly biased in opposing gun rights. CDC official and research head Patrick O’Carroll stated in a 1989 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths.” This sounds more like activist rhetoric than it does scientific research, as O’Carroll effectively set out with the goal of confirmation bias, saying “We will prove it,” and not the scientific objectiveness of asking “Does it?”

‘It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.’

O’Carroll went on to deny he had said this, claiming he was misquoted. However, his successor and director of the CDC National Center of Injury Prevention branch Mark Rosenberg told Rolling Stone in 1993 that he “envisions a long term campaign, similar to tobacco use and auto safety, to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”


He went on to tell theWashington Post in 1994 “We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.”

CDC leaders were not shy about their intentions of banning guns from the public. Sure enough, they acted on their desires.


In October 1993, The New England Journal of Medicine released a study funded by the CDC to the tune of $1.7 million, entitled “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home.” The leader author was Dr. Arthur Kellermann, an epidemiologist, physician, and outspoken advocate of gun control.
In the study, Kellerman concluded that people who kept guns in their homes were 2.7 times more likely to be homicide victims as people who don’t. Major media outlets, such as the New York Times, still cite these statistics.

Unreliable Gun Research

However, the research was beyond flawed. For one, Kellermann used epidemiological methods in an attempt to investigate an issue dealing with criminology. In effect, this means he was treating gun violence the same as, say, the spread of West Nile, or bird flu.


Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.


Other factors that lent to the study’s unreliability were: It is based entirely on people murdered in their homes, with 50 percent admitting this was the result of a “quarrel or romantic triangle,” and 30 percent said it was during a drug deal or other felonies such as rape or burglary; it made no consideration for guns used in self-defense; it provided no proof or examples that the murder weapon used in these crimes belonged to the homeowner or had been kept in that home.

---------------

And this is a good point...

Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.

I didn't even bother to read your blather this time. Of course you disapprove of a study that might actually get to some of the root causes of gun violence. Heaven forfend some of the root cause might be too many handy guns on the street. The CDC realizes 16,000 people a year losing their lives to guns (not suicide) is a health epidemic.

 

[Brain357]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

I don't think a potentially life saving study is a waste.

Healey’s letter points out that more than 33,000 people die from guns every year in the United States. Among the areas that need to be studied, she said, are the effectiveness of gun storage methods, intervention by health care professionals, and the psychology of gun violence.

And that is a lie.......

357,000,000 million guns in private hands in 2014.......

21,000 by gun suicide.

(19,974 non gun suicides)

gun murder in 2014 8,124

Accidental gun deaths, 586

So......that is all the research we need......and the CDC already counts bodies......

How is that a lie you moron?

 

[2aguy]

and who are those people that are dying by guns? suicidal people and criminals.

Victims of criminals. Victims of accidents.

victims of criminals? Are you fuckin kidding me right now? lol

You think criminals are only ones shot?

no, but do you think a lack of guns would heavily influence non-gun crime rates?
The ONLY way gun control would work is if the the WORLD banned guns. Untill then, the crimianls will still have weapons. We have a HUGE black market for weaponry.
ATTENTION : Those people are not lawful gun owners.
This is why I called it a waste. Because that is EXACTLY what it is.

Then the studies would determine that. Gun control is effective however in some forms. Lots of felons have been caught with guns and arrested before killing someone.

Gun studies continued all through the 90s to today............look up gun research.........and you will find gun study after gun study....

The anti gun movement wants to use the CDC to make up numbers and to promote attacks on the gun industry....that is why they keep lying about the CDC not being able to do research...I just posted gun research they did last year..........it is a lie...and brain is the king of liars....

 

[Brain357]

Why the CDC still isn’t researching gun violence, despite the ban being lifted two years ago

 

[OldLady]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

 

[Brain357]

Victims of criminals. Victims of accidents.

victims of criminals? Are you fuckin kidding me right now? lol

You think criminals are only ones shot?

no, but do you think a lack of guns would heavily influence non-gun crime rates?
The ONLY way gun control would work is if the the WORLD banned guns. Untill then, the crimianls will still have weapons. We have a HUGE black market for weaponry.
ATTENTION : Those people are not lawful gun owners.
This is why I called it a waste. Because that is EXACTLY what it is.

Then the studies would determine that. Gun control is effective however in some forms. Lots of felons have been caught with guns and arrested before killing someone.

Gun studies continued all through the 90s to today............look up gun research.........and you will find gun study after gun study....

The anti gun movement wants to use the CDC to make up numbers and to promote attacks on the gun industry....that is why they keep lying about the CDC not being able to do research...I just posted gun research they did last year..........it is a lie...and brain is the king of liars....

They are not CDC studies.

 

[2aguy]

Last four surgeons general call on CDC to resume gun violence studies

And they don't know what they are talking about.......typical government drones....

Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

And the truth.........

CDC Leaders Admit They Want to Ban Guns

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, the CDC was openly biased in opposing gun rights. CDC official and research head Patrick O’Carroll stated in a 1989 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths.” This sounds more like activist rhetoric than it does scientific research, as O’Carroll effectively set out with the goal of confirmation bias, saying “We will prove it,” and not the scientific objectiveness of asking “Does it?”

‘It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.’

O’Carroll went on to deny he had said this, claiming he was misquoted. However, his successor and director of the CDC National Center of Injury Prevention branch Mark Rosenberg told Rolling Stone in 1993 that he “envisions a long term campaign, similar to tobacco use and auto safety, to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”


He went on to tell theWashington Post in 1994 “We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.”

CDC leaders were not shy about their intentions of banning guns from the public. Sure enough, they acted on their desires.


In October 1993, The New England Journal of Medicine released a study funded by the CDC to the tune of $1.7 million, entitled “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home.” The leader author was Dr. Arthur Kellermann, an epidemiologist, physician, and outspoken advocate of gun control.
In the study, Kellerman concluded that people who kept guns in their homes were 2.7 times more likely to be homicide victims as people who don’t. Major media outlets, such as the New York Times, still cite these statistics.

Unreliable Gun Research

However, the research was beyond flawed. For one, Kellermann used epidemiological methods in an attempt to investigate an issue dealing with criminology. In effect, this means he was treating gun violence the same as, say, the spread of West Nile, or bird flu.


Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.


Other factors that lent to the study’s unreliability were: It is based entirely on people murdered in their homes, with 50 percent admitting this was the result of a “quarrel or romantic triangle,” and 30 percent said it was during a drug deal or other felonies such as rape or burglary; it made no consideration for guns used in self-defense; it provided no proof or examples that the murder weapon used in these crimes belonged to the homeowner or had been kept in that home.

---------------

And this is a good point...

Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.

I didn't even bother to read your blather this time. Of course you disapprove of a study that might actually get to some of the root causes of gun violence. Heaven forfend some of the root cause might be too many handy guns on the street. The CDC realizes 16,000 people a year losing their lives to guns (not suicide) is a health epidemic.

Where did you get that number...gun murder is at 8,124 from the FBI table 8...........for 2014, and accidental gun deaths from the CDC for 2014 is 586....in a country with over 357,000,000 million guns.....

You don't realize that the CDC actually did what you say they can't do and they did it last year in 2015......they studied gun violence...and found out that social pathologies made young thugs shoot each other........

 

[2aguy]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

Nope.....I said it didn't matter because Chicago thugs are shooting each other at higher rates than the thugs in L.A. and New York.....and the thugs in those cities can drive just as easily to Arizona, gun friendly, and Vermont, gun friendly as thugs in Chicago can drive to Indiana and Missouri......so gun access isn't driving the murder rate....and normal people....don't have to drive out of state to get guns....and they aren't the ones shooting people....

again, thug culture is the problem...not guns....

 

[Brain357]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

Don't trust anything he says. Most of his claims are lies.

 

[2aguy]

victims of criminals? Are you fuckin kidding me right now? lol

You think criminals are only ones shot?

no, but do you think a lack of guns would heavily influence non-gun crime rates?
The ONLY way gun control would work is if the the WORLD banned guns. Untill then, the crimianls will still have weapons. We have a HUGE black market for weaponry.
ATTENTION : Those people are not lawful gun owners.
This is why I called it a waste. Because that is EXACTLY what it is.

Then the studies would determine that. Gun control is effective however in some forms. Lots of felons have been caught with guns and arrested before killing someone.

Gun studies continued all through the 90s to today............look up gun research.........and you will find gun study after gun study....

The anti gun movement wants to use the CDC to make up numbers and to promote attacks on the gun industry....that is why they keep lying about the CDC not being able to do research...I just posted gun research they did last year..........it is a lie...and brain is the king of liars....

They are not CDC studies.

Moron....the CDC did a study in 2015.........and found that young thug males are shooting each other because of social pathologies.....moron...

 

[2aguy]

Last four surgeons general call on CDC to resume gun violence studies

And they don't know what they are talking about.......typical government drones....

Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

And the truth.........

CDC Leaders Admit They Want to Ban Guns

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, the CDC was openly biased in opposing gun rights. CDC official and research head Patrick O’Carroll stated in a 1989 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths.” This sounds more like activist rhetoric than it does scientific research, as O’Carroll effectively set out with the goal of confirmation bias, saying “We will prove it,” and not the scientific objectiveness of asking “Does it?”

‘It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.’

O’Carroll went on to deny he had said this, claiming he was misquoted. However, his successor and director of the CDC National Center of Injury Prevention branch Mark Rosenberg told Rolling Stone in 1993 that he “envisions a long term campaign, similar to tobacco use and auto safety, to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”


He went on to tell theWashington Post in 1994 “We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.”

CDC leaders were not shy about their intentions of banning guns from the public. Sure enough, they acted on their desires.


In October 1993, The New England Journal of Medicine released a study funded by the CDC to the tune of $1.7 million, entitled “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home.” The leader author was Dr. Arthur Kellermann, an epidemiologist, physician, and outspoken advocate of gun control.
In the study, Kellerman concluded that people who kept guns in their homes were 2.7 times more likely to be homicide victims as people who don’t. Major media outlets, such as the New York Times, still cite these statistics.

Unreliable Gun Research

However, the research was beyond flawed. For one, Kellermann used epidemiological methods in an attempt to investigate an issue dealing with criminology. In effect, this means he was treating gun violence the same as, say, the spread of West Nile, or bird flu.


Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.


Other factors that lent to the study’s unreliability were: It is based entirely on people murdered in their homes, with 50 percent admitting this was the result of a “quarrel or romantic triangle,” and 30 percent said it was during a drug deal or other felonies such as rape or burglary; it made no consideration for guns used in self-defense; it provided no proof or examples that the murder weapon used in these crimes belonged to the homeowner or had been kept in that home.

---------------

And this is a good point...

Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.

I didn't even bother to read your blather this time. Of course you disapprove of a study that might actually get to some of the root causes of gun violence. Heaven forfend some of the root cause might be too many handy guns on the street. The CDC realizes 16,000 people a year losing their lives to guns (not suicide) is a health epidemic.

Here you go....part of the original post..........

Tell me....am I lying........?


Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

 

[OldLady]

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

Nope.....I said it didn't matter because Chicago thugs are shooting each other at higher rates than the thugs in L.A. and New York.....and the thugs in those cities can drive just as easily to Arizona, gun friendly, and Vermont, gun friendly as thugs in Chicago can drive to Indiana and Missouri......so gun access isn't driving the murder rate....and normal people....don't have to drive out of state to get guns....and they aren't the ones shooting people....

again, thug culture is the problem...not guns....

Nope. You said he lied. Trump can get away with that shit, but you can't.

 

[2aguy]

What are they going to study? suicidal people and thugs? Sounds like a waste of time/tax payer dollars

You sound like our governor, who says drug addicts may as well go ahead and die--they'll never be rehabilitated. Is that stance on gun studies Gary Johnson's stance, as well? Thugs' Lives Matter, TN. They weren't born thugs.

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

Tell me with the link and the quote below.........am I lying or is the New York Times lying........brain lies...it is all he has...he is a troll....


This is from 2015.......


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/25/us/cdc-gun-violence-wilmington.html?_r=0



When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.

They were here to examine gun violence.

This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------

The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.

“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,” the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”

Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, I don't sound like that at all.
What does drug addiction have to do with suicide and thugs?
What does their lives mattering have to do with their criminal actions?

The two attitudes are more similar than you think. Criminals' and chronically depressed people's lives don't seem to matter to you, anymore than drug addicts do to our governor. Don't be purposely dense. If the study can come out with the major causes of gun violence in the cities, ways to specifically target the causes and hopefully change them might lead to less people dying or being shot multiple times by guns.

Do you realize the CDC is already doing this, and can already do this....and that it is a lie that the CDC can't study gun violence?

You like to call a lot of things lies, when they aren't. Like the police chief in Chicago, whose cops actually did the hard work to confiscate illegal guns off the streets and figure out where they came from. When he said many of the handguns were coming from neighboring states with gun control loopholes, you said he was lying. Why would he lie, twit?

Nope.....I said it didn't matter because Chicago thugs are shooting each other at higher rates than the thugs in L.A. and New York.....and the thugs in those cities can drive just as easily to Arizona, gun friendly, and Vermont, gun friendly as thugs in Chicago can drive to Indiana and Missouri......so gun access isn't driving the murder rate....and normal people....don't have to drive out of state to get guns....and they aren't the ones shooting people....

again, thug culture is the problem...not guns....

Nope. You said he lied. Trump can get away with that shit, but you can't.

Provide a link to this claim. Since I know you can not be honest I want proof. You said 16000 murders when there were just under 9000 so we know you don't know the truth and will say anything to support your ignorant position.

 

[Brain357]

Last four surgeons general call on CDC to resume gun violence studies

And they don't know what they are talking about.......typical government drones....

Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

And the truth.........

CDC Leaders Admit They Want to Ban Guns

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, the CDC was openly biased in opposing gun rights. CDC official and research head Patrick O’Carroll stated in a 1989 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths.” This sounds more like activist rhetoric than it does scientific research, as O’Carroll effectively set out with the goal of confirmation bias, saying “We will prove it,” and not the scientific objectiveness of asking “Does it?”

‘It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.’

O’Carroll went on to deny he had said this, claiming he was misquoted. However, his successor and director of the CDC National Center of Injury Prevention branch Mark Rosenberg told Rolling Stone in 1993 that he “envisions a long term campaign, similar to tobacco use and auto safety, to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”


He went on to tell theWashington Post in 1994 “We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol — cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly — and banned.”

CDC leaders were not shy about their intentions of banning guns from the public. Sure enough, they acted on their desires.


In October 1993, The New England Journal of Medicine released a study funded by the CDC to the tune of $1.7 million, entitled “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home.” The leader author was Dr. Arthur Kellermann, an epidemiologist, physician, and outspoken advocate of gun control.
In the study, Kellerman concluded that people who kept guns in their homes were 2.7 times more likely to be homicide victims as people who don’t. Major media outlets, such as the New York Times, still cite these statistics.

Unreliable Gun Research

However, the research was beyond flawed. For one, Kellermann used epidemiological methods in an attempt to investigate an issue dealing with criminology. In effect, this means he was treating gun violence the same as, say, the spread of West Nile, or bird flu.


Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.


Other factors that lent to the study’s unreliability were: It is based entirely on people murdered in their homes, with 50 percent admitting this was the result of a “quarrel or romantic triangle,” and 30 percent said it was during a drug deal or other felonies such as rape or burglary; it made no consideration for guns used in self-defense; it provided no proof or examples that the murder weapon used in these crimes belonged to the homeowner or had been kept in that home.

---------------

And this is a good point...

Furthermore, the gun victims he studied were anomalies. They were selected from homicide victims living in metropolitan areas with high gun-crime statistics, which completely discounted the statistical goliath of areas where gun owners engage in little to no crime.

I didn't even bother to read your blather this time. Of course you disapprove of a study that might actually get to some of the root causes of gun violence. Heaven forfend some of the root cause might be too many handy guns on the street. The CDC realizes 16,000 people a year losing their lives to guns (not suicide) is a health epidemic.

Here you go....part of the original post..........

Tell me....am I lying........?


Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

Firstly, CDC was not banned from doing the research. In fact, CDC articles pertaining to firearms have held steady since the defunding, and even increased to 121 in 2013.

CDC very recently released a 16-page report that was commissioned by the city council of Wilmington, Delaware, on factors contributing to its abnormally high gun crime, and methods of prevention. The study weighed factors such as where the guns were coming from, the sex of the offenders, likeliness of committing a gun crime, and how unemployment plays a factor.

In other words it studied, the environment surrounding the crime.
This did not go over well with some in the media, who were disappointed it didn’t implicate firearms as a cause and not an effect. Kate Masters of VICE.com wrote, “If the CDC wasn’t going to consider the role of firearms in Wilmington’s gun crimes, why do the study at all?” That sounds an awful lot like, “If you have nothing bad to say about guns, then don’t say anything.”

So they didn't consider the role of firearms. That is avoiding studying guns.