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

[Rustic]

I don't think banning guns has much, if any, effect on suicide rates: World suicide rates by country

Look at the countries listed with the highest rates: Japan, South Korea, Finland, Belgium....

The fact remains, gun violence is a relative nonissue in this country.
The "white" progressives look the other way with black on black crime, their outrage is always selective.

Our commander in chief and his loopy wife need to look to their own back yard(Chicago) for the highest crime rate in the country.

Hashtag we have an dumb a$$ president

Gun violence isn't a "relative nonissue" - what gives you that idea?

Because it is...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't think banning guns has much, if any, effect on suicide rates: World suicide rates by country

Look at the countries listed with the highest rates: Japan, South Korea, Finland, Belgium....

The fact remains, gun violence is a relative nonissue in this country.
The "white" progressives look the other way with black on black crime, their outrage is always selective.

Our commander in chief and his loopy wife need to look to their own back yard(Chicago) for the highest crime rate in the country.

Hashtag we have an dumb a$$ president

Gun violence isn't a "relative nonissue" - what gives you that idea?

Really? 9000 murders a year out of 320 million people is not a big problem.

 

[Rustic]

I don't think banning guns has much, if any, effect on suicide rates: World suicide rates by country

Look at the countries listed with the highest rates: Japan, South Korea, Finland, Belgium....

The fact remains, gun violence is a relative nonissue in this country.
The "white" progressives look the other way with black on black crime, their outrage is always selective.

Our commander in chief and his loopy wife need to look to their own back yard(Chicago) for the highest crime rate in the country.

Hashtag we have an dumb a$$ president

Gun violence isn't a "relative nonissue" - what gives you that idea?

Really? 9000 murders a year out of 320 million people is not a big problem.

It's all about "control" with progressives, and their selective "outrage"
Is what are... Petty.

 

[JoeB131]

Guns are used for several purposes. Guns are used for protection against assaults, protection of property, law enforcement, in wars, for hunting, competition, and many have gun collections that are worth a lot of money. Also, guns are harmless until someone uses them for the wrong reasons. Therefore, it's NOT guns that cause concern, it's PEOPLE that use guns for the wrong reasons. In addition, knives, baseball bats, and other items also cause deaths. Cars and trucks cause deaths. Airplanes and trains cause deaths. We have drugs that cause deaths. Alcohol causes deaths.

GUNS are NOT the issue with violence, suicide, or with anything else. The issue is PEOPLE.

"PLEASE< PLEASE, PLEASE don't take my guns!!!!"

You are right. PEOPLE WITH GUNS are the problem. And you gun nuts do nothing to keep the guns out of the hands of people like Lanza and Mercer and Holmes.

Here's the thing. Cars are LICENSED. If you own a car, you have to be tested, insured, licensed, your car has to be inspected to make sure it's safe to be on the road and we have a whole police force that enforces the safe useage of cars.

I'd have no problem with guns if we regulated them like cars.

But then some guy with a tiny pecker will come back and whine, "But the Founding Fathers said we have a riiiiiiiiiiiiight to guns!"

and we have 33,000 deaths and 78,000 gun injuries every year.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Really? 9000 murders a year out of 320 million people is not a big problem.

It's a HUGE problem if it's someone you care about.

Maybe you should say that shit to a Sandy Hook Parent.

 

[JoeB131]

bill clinton says that guns stop violent crime 1.5 million times a year.

Bill Clinton said nothing of the sort. DGU's are a myth.

 

[LOki]

Guns are used for several purposes. Guns are used for protection against assaults, protection of property, law enforcement, in wars, for hunting, competition, and many have gun collections that are worth a lot of money. Also, guns are harmless until someone uses them for the wrong reasons. Therefore, it's NOT guns that cause concern, it's PEOPLE that use guns for the wrong reasons. In addition, knives, baseball bats, and other items also cause deaths. Cars and trucks cause deaths. Airplanes and trains cause deaths. We have drugs that cause deaths. Alcohol causes deaths.

GUNS are NOT the issue with violence, suicide, or with anything else. The issue is PEOPLE.

"PLEASE< PLEASE, PLEASE don't take my guns!!!!"

You are right. PEOPLE WITH GUNS are the problem. And you gun nuts do nothing to keep the guns out of the hands of people like Lanza and Mercer and Holmes.

Fact 1: Just get rid of the people who have an over-developed sense of entitlement to use violence against their fellows: problem solved.

Fact 2: Just get rid of guns: problem remains.

The "gun problem" is a problem only for who have an over-developed sense of entitlement to use violence against their fellows; guns are a problem that only the criminally violent have to overcome... for OBVIOUS reasons.

Here's the thing. Cars are LICENSED. If you own a car, you have to be tested, insured, licensed, your car has to be inspected to make sure it's safe to be on the road and we have a whole police force that enforces the safe useage of cars.

I'd have no problem with guns if we regulated them like cars.

But then some guy with a tiny pecker will come back and whine, "But the Founding Fathers said we have a riiiiiiiiiiiiight to guns!"

and we have 33,000 deaths and 78,000 gun injuries every year.

The whole "Gun Violence" argument = tautology. The entire "gun violence" argument is meaningless.

Asserting that "gun violence" would be diminished by removing guns, is asserting the same kind of meaningless tautology that asserts getting rid of boats would diminish drownings; the argument is specious, and it distracts from discussing a "violence problem"--a problem that is not solvable by these gun-control laws you advocate.

When you deliberately create the special category of "gun violence" so that you can both include violence that was not caused by guns; and exclude violence caused by people (but without using guns), you tacitly admit that you're JUST FINE with all the violence in the world... provided no gun was involved.

"Gun Violence"...the rhetorical tautology that exposes anti-rights advocates for the callous human shit-birds that they are.

 

[Geaux4it]

[
Really? 9000 murders a year out of 320 million people is not a big problem.

It's a HUGE problem if it's someone you care about.

Maybe you should say that shit to a Sandy Hook Parent.

You don't give a shit Joe....Quit acting like it.

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Gun deaths are acceptable risk because the worst society has to offer are eating their own. That's a good thing!!!

-Geaux

 

[Sonny Clark]

Guns are used for several purposes. Guns are used for protection against assaults, protection of property, law enforcement, in wars, for hunting, competition, and many have gun collections that are worth a lot of money. Also, guns are harmless until someone uses them for the wrong reasons. Therefore, it's NOT guns that cause concern, it's PEOPLE that use guns for the wrong reasons. In addition, knives, baseball bats, and other items also cause deaths. Cars and trucks cause deaths. Airplanes and trains cause deaths. We have drugs that cause deaths. Alcohol causes deaths.

GUNS are NOT the issue with violence, suicide, or with anything else. The issue is PEOPLE.

"PLEASE< PLEASE, PLEASE don't take my guns!!!!"

You are right. PEOPLE WITH GUNS are the problem. And you gun nuts do nothing to keep the guns out of the hands of people like Lanza and Mercer and Holmes.

Here's the thing. Cars are LICENSED. If you own a car, you have to be tested, insured, licensed, your car has to be inspected to make sure it's safe to be on the road and we have a whole police force that enforces the safe useage of cars.

I'd have no problem with guns if we regulated them like cars.

But then some guy with a tiny pecker will come back and whine, "But the Founding Fathers said we have a riiiiiiiiiiiiight to guns!"

and we have 33,000 deaths and 78,000 gun injuries every year.

Again, and please listen this time, I AM NOT A GUN NUT !!!!!!!!!!!!! ----- How many times do I have to repeat that before you can understand it?

You can NOT regulate guns, it's impossible to enforce anti-gun laws. You can NOT legislate guns away. You can NOT go door to door and collect all of the guns. ONE MORE TIME FOR YOUR BENEFIT: Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. The bad guys are not going to turn their guns in to law enforcement. You can NOT stop guns from crossing our borders. You can not stop guns from being sold on the black market.

AGAIN, FOR YOUR BENEFIT: Guns are NOT the problem, PEOPLE ARE THE PROBLEM. A gun harms no one until it is used by a crazy against another person. A loaded gun can be placed on a table and never harm anyone, for decades. Guns do not take it upon themselves to harm anyone. A gun does NOT have a mind, a brain, and the ability to fire a round, all on its own. A gun is harmless until a crazy uses it for all the wrong reasons. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GUNS THAT ARE THE PROBLEM.

So, the bottom line is, if we're to be concerned about deaths due to the use of guns, then we should spend our time, energy, and resources on the root cause, which is PEOPLE. Even if you get rid of guns, the bad guys will figure out other ways to do their dirty work. Evil always find ways to do evil.

Please take the time to read the above several times, so that you wont continue to say that I'm a gun nut, and other nonsense that you continue to repeat. Thanks.

 

[gipper]

Guns are used for several purposes. Guns are used for protection against assaults, protection of property, law enforcement, in wars, for hunting, competition, and many have gun collections that are worth a lot of money. Also, guns are harmless until someone uses them for the wrong reasons. Therefore, it's NOT guns that cause concern, it's PEOPLE that use guns for the wrong reasons. In addition, knives, baseball bats, and other items also cause deaths. Cars and trucks cause deaths. Airplanes and trains cause deaths. We have drugs that cause deaths. Alcohol causes deaths.

GUNS are NOT the issue with violence, suicide, or with anything else. The issue is PEOPLE.

"PLEASE< PLEASE, PLEASE don't take my guns!!!!"

You are right. PEOPLE WITH GUNS are the problem. And you gun nuts do nothing to keep the guns out of the hands of people like Lanza and Mercer and Holmes.

Here's the thing. Cars are LICENSED. If you own a car, you have to be tested, insured, licensed, your car has to be inspected to make sure it's safe to be on the road and we have a whole police force that enforces the safe useage of cars.

I'd have no problem with guns if we regulated them like cars.

But then some guy with a tiny pecker will come back and whine, "But the Founding Fathers said we have a riiiiiiiiiiiiight to guns!"

and we have 33,000 deaths and 78,000 gun injuries every year.

Again, and please listen this time, I AM NOT A GUN NUT !!!!!!!!!!!!! ----- How many times do I have to repeat that before you can understand it?

You can NOT regulate guns, it's impossible to enforce anti-gun laws. You can NOT legislate guns away. You can NOT go door to door and collect all of the guns. ONE MORE TIME FOR YOUR BENEFIT: Anyone that wants a gun, can get their hands on a gun. The bad guys are not going to turn their guns in to law enforcement. You can NOT stop guns from crossing our borders. You can not stop guns from being sold on the black market.

AGAIN, FOR YOUR BENEFIT: Guns are NOT the problem, PEOPLE ARE THE PROBLEM. A gun harms no one until it is used by a crazy against another person. A loaded gun can be placed on a table and never harm anyone, for decades. Guns do not take it upon themselves to harm anyone. A gun does NOT have a mind, a brain, and the ability to fire a round, all on its own. A gun is harmless until a crazy uses it for all the wrong reasons. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GUNS THAT ARE THE PROBLEM.

So, the bottom line is, if we're to be concerned about deaths due to the use of guns, then we should spend our time, energy, and resources on the root cause, which is PEOPLE. Even if you get rid of guns, the bad guys will figure out other ways to do their dirty work. Evil always find ways to do evil.

Please take the time to read the above several times, so that you wont continue to say that I'm a gun nut, and other nonsense that you continue to repeat. Thanks.

You are using logic in a debate with someone who is a partisan hack. It doesn't work.

He only knows what the DNC tells him.

He believes only government should have guns, which anyone with a functioning brain knows results in death and suffering....he willfully ignores the historical facts.

 

[LOki]

Hard to say what ideas the study might produce. Why are you afraid to even try? The childish claim that any attempt to prevent unnecessary deaths is the same as confiscating guns is just stupid.

Exactly. Two aspects of studying death due to guns are suicides and accidental deaths, both of which are well worth studying.

And darn if no one in this country is studying those things.

So why is Congress specifically preventing CDC from studying it? They don't put poliitcal pressure on any other studies.

They aren't and you know it.

You might want to read this FORBES article from last Thursday. There is a congressional ban on the CDC studying gun violence.
Congressional Ban Hampers CDC Scientists From Studying Gun Suicides

So what?

It's not there's a ban on studying gun violence.

 

[2aguy]

The problem is PEOPLE, and NOT guns. The gun industry is an important and vital industry.

What was that about you not being a gun nut again?

No, guy, the gun industry is not vital.

The gun industry costs America 33,000 lives, 78,000 injuries and 229 BILLION in expenses every year.

Every other industrialized country has figured this out and only limited gun ownership to those with valid needs.

The gun industry didn't cost any lives…..democrat policies have though

bill clinton says that guns stop violent crime 1.5 million times a year.

Criminals use guns to murder people in 2014….8,124 times.

Which number is bigger.

Suicide with guns is not an issue because another 19,000 Americans commit suicide without guns….so the people who used guns…will simply use what the other 19,000 used.

And Japan, South Korea, and China have 0 access to guns….and 2 times the suicide rate we have...

People are being so knee-jerk reactive to any discussion involving guns and research and violence.

The issue of suicide is one example. It's not an issue of numbers per se and the claim isn't that gun ownership directly correlates with suicide rates. But research has shown 51% of suicide deaths are by firearm. Frequently, it's impulsive and if the person can hang in there for a few more days, the urge may pass or they may get help. One reason behind legislation for mandatory waiting times was to address this. A person who feels suicidal, decides to go out and get a gun, but if he has to wait 48 hrs, he may no longer feel he needs to kill himself or take it out on others.

Sorry…cultures with 0 gun ownership have more suicides than we do….and 19,000 people commit suicide in the U.S. and don't use a gun to do it. The most popular method of suicide around the world is hanging……..

 

[2aguy]

I wish I, or anyone else had doable, workable solutions to those problems, but for now no one seems to. That's why the problems need to be studied. If you are willing to just accept the large amounts of unnecessary deaths as "stuff happens" then you are an idiot. The American people have decided that the status quo is not acceptable. The only ones holding up any attempt to improve things are the NRA and their bought and paid for republican politicians, and a few crazy right wingers. Those obstacles will be removed soon.

Well, what can be done even if a study is done? Have any ideas? Or, are just all for wasting tax dollars on nonsense? Lets say for the sake of argument that a study is done, and evidence points to a certain problem. Then what? Still, even after a study is done, there are NO solutions to gun violence, NONE. It is impossible to remove all of the guns, and even more impossible to determine who may, or may not, commit acts of gun violence. Use common sense here, please. Regardless of what a study might indicate, the problem remains one of human behavior. So, how do we alter human behavior?

Hard to say what ideas the study might produce. Why are you afraid to even try? The childish claim that any attempt to prevent unnecessary deaths is the same as confiscating guns is just stupid.

Exactly. Two aspects of studying death due to guns are suicides and accidental deaths, both of which are well worth studying.

And darn if no one in this country is studying those things.

So why is Congress specifically preventing CDC from studying it? They don't put poliitcal pressure on any other studies.

They are prohibited from using research to advocate an anti 2nd Amendment position…….which they have done in the past……..

 

[2aguy]

I don't think banning guns has much, if any, effect on suicide rates: World suicide rates by country

Look at the countries listed with the highest rates: Japan, South Korea, Finland, Belgium....

The fact remains, gun violence is a relative nonissue in this country.
The "white" progressives look the other way with black on black crime, their outrage is always selective.

Our commander in chief and his loopy wife need to look to their own back yard(Chicago) for the highest crime rate in the country.

Hashtag we have an dumb a$$ president

Gun violence isn't a "relative nonissue" - what gives you that idea?

Really? 9000 murders a year out of 320 million people is not a big problem.

8,124 murders committed by criminals in tiny areas of our cities….mostly under democrat control.

 

[2aguy]

bill clinton says that guns stop violent crime 1.5 million times a year.

Bill Clinton said nothing of the sort. DGU's are a myth.

Sorry…he commissioned a study to refute Dr. Gary Kleck's study on defensive gun use…he had the Department of Justice hire two rabid anti gunners to create a study to directly show that Kleck was wrong…..they executed the study….and found that guns were used by Americans 1.5 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives…...

 

[2aguy]

Guns are used for several purposes. Guns are used for protection against assaults, protection of property, law enforcement, in wars, for hunting, competition, and many have gun collections that are worth a lot of money. Also, guns are harmless until someone uses them for the wrong reasons. Therefore, it's NOT guns that cause concern, it's PEOPLE that use guns for the wrong reasons. In addition, knives, baseball bats, and other items also cause deaths. Cars and trucks cause deaths. Airplanes and trains cause deaths. We have drugs that cause deaths. Alcohol causes deaths.

GUNS are NOT the issue with violence, suicide, or with anything else. The issue is PEOPLE.

"PLEASE< PLEASE, PLEASE don't take my guns!!!!"

You are right. PEOPLE WITH GUNS are the problem. And you gun nuts do nothing to keep the guns out of the hands of people like Lanza and Mercer and Holmes.

Here's the thing. Cars are LICENSED. If you own a car, you have to be tested, insured, licensed, your car has to be inspected to make sure it's safe to be on the road and we have a whole police force that enforces the safe useage of cars.

I'd have no problem with guns if we regulated them like cars.

But then some guy with a tiny pecker will come back and whine, "But the Founding Fathers said we have a riiiiiiiiiiiiight to guns!"

and we have 33,000 deaths and 78,000 gun injuries every year.

Dipstick……..lanza, mercer and holmes either passed all the current gun laws to get their guns or lanza who killed to get his guns…but still could have passed all the gun laws on his own….

All of the mass shooters we have seen would have been able to get a license, would have registered their guns and would have passed any background check……..the two shooters at Columbine were too young to pass the gun laws of their time so they bought their guns illegally…


So genius…….what would licensing normal gun owners do to stop mass shooters….?

We have only 8,124 gun murders last year in a country of over 320 million people with over 320 million guns in private hands….with 13 million people now carrying guns for self defense….

we do not have a gun problem or really a problem with mass shooters….

Mass shooters, driven by the media, kill less than 75 people a year…cars….34,000……..

And Americans with guns use them to stop 1.5 million criminals a year according to bill clinton.

 

[Coyote]

The problem is PEOPLE, and NOT guns. The gun industry is an important and vital industry.

What was that about you not being a gun nut again?

No, guy, the gun industry is not vital.

The gun industry costs America 33,000 lives, 78,000 injuries and 229 BILLION in expenses every year.

Every other industrialized country has figured this out and only limited gun ownership to those with valid needs.

The gun industry didn't cost any lives…..democrat policies have though

bill clinton says that guns stop violent crime 1.5 million times a year.

Criminals use guns to murder people in 2014….8,124 times.

Which number is bigger.

Suicide with guns is not an issue because another 19,000 Americans commit suicide without guns….so the people who used guns…will simply use what the other 19,000 used.

And Japan, South Korea, and China have 0 access to guns….and 2 times the suicide rate we have...

People are being so knee-jerk reactive to any discussion involving guns and research and violence.

The issue of suicide is one example. It's not an issue of numbers per se and the claim isn't that gun ownership directly correlates with suicide rates. But research has shown 51% of suicide deaths are by firearm. Frequently, it's impulsive and if the person can hang in there for a few more days, the urge may pass or they may get help. One reason behind legislation for mandatory waiting times was to address this. A person who feels suicidal, decides to go out and get a gun, but if he has to wait 48 hrs, he may no longer feel he needs to kill himself or take it out on others.

Sorry…cultures with 0 gun ownership have more suicides than we do….and 19,000 people commit suicide in the U.S. and don't use a gun to do it. The most popular method of suicide around the world is hanging……..

Not across the board they don't. Some have hire rates, some lower - the only thing it shows is that there is not a strong correlation between gun ownership and suicides and most likely there are stronger factors involved such as culture and availability of help. However research does break down suicide by method and in the US 51% are by gun. When you look at that, it would be rational to do some research and see if there is any way to reduce it, such as waiting periods. Same with certain types of gun violence that involve impulse and anger. Why keep denying it? People seem to see this as an all or nothing - you either confiscate guns or have no restrictions, when it's not.

 

[Coyote]

Well, what can be done even if a study is done? Have any ideas? Or, are just all for wasting tax dollars on nonsense? Lets say for the sake of argument that a study is done, and evidence points to a certain problem. Then what? Still, even after a study is done, there are NO solutions to gun violence, NONE. It is impossible to remove all of the guns, and even more impossible to determine who may, or may not, commit acts of gun violence. Use common sense here, please. Regardless of what a study might indicate, the problem remains one of human behavior. So, how do we alter human behavior?

Hard to say what ideas the study might produce. Why are you afraid to even try? The childish claim that any attempt to prevent unnecessary deaths is the same as confiscating guns is just stupid.

Exactly. Two aspects of studying death due to guns are suicides and accidental deaths, both of which are well worth studying.

And darn if no one in this country is studying those things.

So why is Congress specifically preventing CDC from studying it? They don't put poliitcal pressure on any other studies.

They are prohibited from using research to advocate an anti 2nd Amendment position…….which they have done in the past……..

The law was so poorly written it was interpreted to prohibit way more than that and essentially squash research.
The Congressman Who Restricted Gun Violence Research Has Regrets

At first, the House tried to close down the CDC's entire, $46 million National Center for Injury Prevention. When that failed, Dickey stepped in with an alternative: strip $2.6 million that the agency had spent on gun studies that year. The money would eventually be re-appropriated for studies unrelated to guns. But the far more damaging inclusion was language that stated, “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”


Dickey proclaimed victory -- an end, he said at the time, to the CDC's attempts "to raise emotional sympathy" around gun violence. But the agency spent the subsequent years petrified of doing any research on gun violence, making the costs of the amendment cleare even to Dickey himself.


He said the law was over-interpreted. Now, he looks at simple advances in highway safety -- safety barriers, for example -- and wonders what could have been done for guns.

"If we had somehow gotten the research going, we could have somehow found a solution to the gun violence without there being any restrictions on the Second Amendment," Dickey said. "We could have used that all these years to develop the equivalent of that little small fence​

 

[LOki]

Hard to say what ideas the study might produce. Why are you afraid to even try? The childish claim that any attempt to prevent unnecessary deaths is the same as confiscating guns is just stupid.

Exactly. Two aspects of studying death due to guns are suicides and accidental deaths, both of which are well worth studying.

And darn if no one in this country is studying those things.

So why is Congress specifically preventing CDC from studying it? They don't put poliitcal pressure on any other studies.

They are prohibited from using research to advocate an anti 2nd Amendment position…….which they have done in the past……..

The law was so poorly written it was interpreted to prohibit way more than that and essentially squash research.
The Congressman Who Restricted Gun Violence Research Has Regrets

At first, the House tried to close down the CDC's entire, $46 million National Center for Injury Prevention. When that failed, Dickey stepped in with an alternative: strip $2.6 million that the agency had spent on gun studies that year. The money would eventually be re-appropriated for studies unrelated to guns. But the far more damaging inclusion was language that stated, “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”


Dickey proclaimed victory -- an end, he said at the time, to the CDC's attempts "to raise emotional sympathy" around gun violence. But the agency spent the subsequent years petrified of doing any research on gun violence, making the costs of the amendment cleare even to Dickey himself.


He said the law was over-interpreted. Now, he looks at simple advances in highway safety -- safety barriers, for example -- and wonders what could have been done for guns.

"If we had somehow gotten the research going, we could have somehow found a solution to the gun violence without there being any restrictions on the Second Amendment," Dickey said. "We could have used that all these years to develop the equivalent of that little small fence​

So what?

It's like not there's a ban on studying gun violence.