General Discussion

KamaAina

(78,249 posts) Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:03 PM Apr 2015

Gun owners face much higher murder risks, researchers said. Then the NRA silenced them.

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-04-12/gun-owners-face-much-higher-murder-risks-researchers-said-then-nra-silenced-them

Back in the early 1990s, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control provided funding for studies on gun violence. The NRA was not pleased....

Rivara says 10 pro-gun senators worked to get the ear of Arlen Specter, then a senator from Pennsylvania and chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee.

“(Specter) approached the Centers for Disease and Control and discussed the idea that this research was biased,” says Rivara. Congress “ended up cutting the CDC budget by the exact amount of money that was used to fund the gun research. They had first threatened to cut all of the funding for injury research at the CDC. They didn’t do that, but they ended up cutting it by the exact amount that was spent on gun research.”

And that wasn't all. “More importantly, however, was that they put a clause for the appropriations of the CDC that essentially blocked all gun research for the next two decades," Rivara says.

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gun owners face much higher murder risks, researchers said. Then the NRA silenced them. (Original Post) KamaAina Apr 2015 OP

Sadly, you'll be silenced too. johnp3907 Apr 2015 #1

My theory is that the post is not about guns per se KamaAina Apr 2015 #4

That's how I see it too. johnp3907 Apr 2015 #5

Could you repost this in the Gungeon as well, please? and GCRA while you're at it? Electric Monk Apr 2015 #2

Be my guest. KamaAina Apr 2015 #3

Invite someone to go play in the septic tank? TheCowsCameHome Apr 2015 #11

I suggested GCRA as well. Threads like this are kinda why GCRA exists on DU. Electric Monk Apr 2015 #12

In before the lock. flamin lib Apr 2015 #6

See post #4 upthread. KamaAina Apr 2015 #7

nra should be charged as accomplices to every shooting. PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #8

Since we have reduced our murder and manslaughter rates by 50% since the early 90's hack89 Apr 2015 #9

You would have to address that to the researchers who conducted the study KamaAina Apr 2015 #10

You don't like Hillary I take it? hack89 Apr 2015 #13

Not particularly. KamaAina Apr 2015 #14

No data no problem gratuitous Apr 2015 #15

The data is still being collected by the FBI and the CDC hack89 Apr 2015 #16

That would be news to the CDC gratuitous Apr 2015 #17

Two separate issues hack89 Apr 2015 #19

SOS seveneyes Apr 2015 #18

johnp3907

(3,733 posts)

1. Sadly, you'll be silenced too.

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:05 PM

Apr 2015

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)

4. My theory is that the post is not about guns per se

Reply to johnp3907 (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:13 PM

Apr 2015

but about the nefarious way the NRA exercises political influence.

johnp3907

(3,733 posts)

5. That's how I see it too.

Reply to KamaAina (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:14 PM

Apr 2015

I hope it doesn't get locked.

Electric Monk

(13,869 posts)

2. Could you repost this in the Gungeon as well, please? and GCRA while you're at it?

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:07 PM

Apr 2015

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1262

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)

3. Be my guest.

Reply to Electric Monk (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:12 PM

Apr 2015

I don't even like doing jury service for Gungeon posts.

TheCowsCameHome

(40,169 posts)

11. Invite someone to go play in the septic tank?

Reply to Electric Monk (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:31 PM

Apr 2015

That's not very nice.

Electric Monk

(13,869 posts)

12. I suggested GCRA as well. Threads like this are kinda why GCRA exists on DU.

Reply to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:34 PM

Apr 2015

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1262

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)

6. In before the lock.

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:14 PM

Apr 2015

Unfortunately your thread will get locked as gun threads are specifically forbidden in GD. It's a good thread though and there are other places to put it as noted above.

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)

7. See post #4 upthread.

Reply to flamin lib (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:15 PM

Apr 2015

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)

8. nra should be charged as accomplices to every shooting.

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:17 PM

Apr 2015

Ban all guns!!!

hack89

(39,171 posts)

9. Since we have reduced our murder and manslaughter rates by 50% since the early 90's

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:23 PM

Apr 2015

are we to understand that a significant reduction in gun ownership rates also happened? That would be the logical conclusion of your OP correct?

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)

10. You would have to address that to the researchers who conducted the study

Reply to hack89 (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:26 PM

Apr 2015

and why am I not surprised to see you using the rightward-pointing arrow?

edit: There's a fallacy in your reasoning. Overall murder rates have indeed declined, but has the gap between gun-owners and non-gun-owners narrowed?

hack89

(39,171 posts)

13. You don't like Hillary I take it?

Reply to KamaAina (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:39 PM

Apr 2015

I took the time to read the articles - what struck me was how no distinction was made between legal and illegal gun ownership. No one was asked if they could legally own a gun. Then you read that drug/alcohol/domestic violence also played a significant role. So how many of these "homes" were actually associated with criminal activity? How many of those guns were owned by people that could not legally own guns? This was at the height of the crack epidemic- the absolute peak of criminal violence in modern times. I suspect a lot of these murders reflect drug and gang violence.

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)

14. Not particularly.

Reply to hack89 (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:41 PM

Apr 2015

I will, however, vote for her if she is the Dem nominee.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)

15. No data no problem

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:41 PM

Apr 2015

You keep a record of statistics and facts, and suddenly it's impossible to quantify why gun deaths went down, went up, or stayed the same. Heck, if you don't even keep track of the number of gun deaths, then you can say (for instance) that the number has declined and who's to say any different?

hack89

(39,171 posts)

16. The data is still being collected by the FBI and the CDC

Reply to gratuitous (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 05:45 PM

Apr 2015

that has never changed.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)

17. That would be news to the CDC

Reply to hack89 (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 07:26 PM

Apr 2015

Because they don't have any funding to do so.

http://www.propublica.org/article/republicans-say-no-to-cdc-gun-violence-research

But since it's the Republicans and not the NRA who decide what gets funded and not funded at CDC, it's obvious that the lack of funding has nothing whatsoever to do with the NRA and its lobbying efforts. By the way, anybody want to buy a bridge? Got the deed for the Brooklyn Bridge back in my car . . .

hack89

(39,171 posts)

19. Two separate issues

Reply to gratuitous (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 07:40 PM

Apr 2015

they get data on gun violence, accidents and deaths from a variety of sources. They were not allowed to do analytical studies with it.

Go to the WISQARS database on the CDC website. That is how you can access the data.

seveneyes

(4,631 posts)

18. SOS

Reply to KamaAina (Original post)

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 07:32 PM

Apr 2015

There is no up without a down. No left, no right. No in, no out. Same old shit.

Reply to this discussion