View Full Version : CDC Takes on Gun Research
ViperTwoSix
10-03-21, 09:05
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/funded-research.html
From the article:
“Objective One: Research to help inform the development of innovative and promising opportunities to enhance safety and prevent firearm-related injuries, deaths, and crime.
Objective Two: Research to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of innovative and promising strategies to keep individuals, families, schools, and communities safe from firearm-related injuries, deaths, and crime.”
This could be a double edged sword. On one side, their research could prove and validate that “assault weapons” bans, magazine capacity laws, pistol braces, etc. have extremely little effect of preventing violence. On the other side, this could become an extremely biased and political study used to further the efforts to disarm Americans.
In the past two years, America has placed an ungodly amount of power in the hands of the CDC. As a country, we have allowed their opinions to shut down our economy, place is all on house arrest, and convince employers to force employees to put chemical substances (the vaccine) into the or bodies or be fired and have there ability to provide for their families completely removed. In New York, now you will not even be eligible for unemployment benefits if you are terminated from employment for refusing to get the vaccine.
Think about that. No work and no state assistance if you choose not to get vaccinated.
Now think about this scenario: The CDC writes an publishes an opinion that firearms and firearm owners are a danger to public health, and must be stopped for “the greater good” of society and our health. They, in combination with liberal government, convince employers that they must find out who of their employees own firearms, and then force them to surrender those firearms or be terminated. Also, if they refuse, they aren’t eligible for any state benefits either. Take it a step further- since anyone owning a firearm is a danger to public health, their children should be taken from them unless they surrender their firearms.
We have allowed this to happen with giving up the right to choose what chemicals we put in our bodies, who says it won’t be done with firearms?
The CDC has an anti-gun bias and will do as they are directed. Research will be skewed.
It won’t be a “double-edged sword”, it’ll be a shot to the heart of liberty.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The CDC has an anti-gun bias and will do as they are directed. Research will be skewed.
It won’t be a “double-edged sword”, it’ll be a shot to the heart of liberty.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^^^^This.
While it is being sold as 'research', they already have an agenda and are using this as a way of milking funds from the government to help foster a predetermined anti-gun outcome. Any other findings will be dismissed.
The CDC needs to remain focused on diseases. As the most recent events have demonstrated, what should be their strong suit came off rather poorly and their credibility is close to non-existent. Distractions like this certainly won't help.
Business_Casual
10-03-21, 12:15
This is the coming “gundemic” I’ve been talking about.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?231825-When%92s-the-next-lock-down-for-COOF
In the poll there’s a Gundemic option and on page 23.
As said above, this is a) the CDC and b) under an extremely political regime currently ostracizing its own members for not being progressive enough. They'll contort the 'research' to fit predefined goals...counting self defense shootings and suicides as gun violence being two of the favorite skews.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-03-21, 13:25
I used to think that the interstate business clause was the most abused, overused power grab by the federal government. The CDC has basically said “Hold my federal register“.
If the CDC can keep you from collecting rent from private contracts for 18 months, its power is basically limitless.
My guess is to stop the pandemic of violence they could very easily stop sales of ammunition, and probably even firearms. They could also say that because of the pandemic you need to quarantine your weapons at home. And cannot take them outside. Lefty federal judges would definitely uphold these as not violating the Second amendment because there are already so many guns in circulation they’re not limiting you to having them. They’re just putting a moratorium on new guns for right now. Then they’ll put some kind of stat on there that if your county has so many deaths or murders with guns per 100,000 you can’t take a gun outside. It sounds bat crap crazy. But considering what they’ve done during natural disasters, if they declare a national gun violence pandemic, how is that much different? Plus we live in a bizarro world right now, so it’s hard to actually go too crazy with predictions.
The only research that gets funded is research that supports the narrative.
The same holds true with which medical journals get published.
And despite their trying to pull anti 2A crap(and other deceptive activities) for decades there are a good many who parrot any and all claims as 100% true/accurate/factual.
Firearms forums(if still in existence) will make for interesting reading.
"Wow! 43 times more likely is fact! Says so right there in the CDC data!"
The same holds true with which medical journals get published.
Perhaps some medical journals, for some articles, but not most of them.
I'd say the CDC has blown any credibility they had with the average American citizen over their disastrous COVID response and messaging. That still won't stop them from doing the will of their communist masters.
john armond
10-03-21, 15:55
I may be remembering this incorrectly, but wasn’t the original reason congress banned funding the CDC to study guns years ago because the director at the time stated something along the lines that their goal was a firearms ban?
Well of course this will be for gun control, that is why they are doing it.
If it was about safety they would had done long before now.
Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
CDC well look at what they did with covid ! pure manipulation
since the epidemic of gun violence is real and needs to be addressed has been pushed so much by all politicians this is going to be up their with covid for false info and made out to be way way more than it is and of course covered up lied about reality
don't just blame criminals !
The only research that gets funded is research that supports the narrative.
As it applies to the CDC and guns, accurate.
The same holds true with which medical journals get published.
Not accurate. That's not to say sci/med journals can't have their own bias as to what gets published, funding sources don't dictate that per se.
I have been published a bit, know a chit ton of people who publish for a living, not a one asked about funding sources as a rec for publication. You do have to reveal your funding sources and any other conflicts of interest for obvious reasons. Scientists report "no conflict of interest" to journals when they do, can and do get nailed for it. It still happens however.
That's one of various reasons you wait until a study has been reproduced by a different group/lab at least once before getting too excited about the results if possible, especially if they seem too good to be true, and or, any of the authors have a financial conflict, and so forth.
The 'net now allows pretty much anyone willing to pay the ability to publish in some journal some place, and there's now pre print stuff (published before it's even peer reviewed for readers who often don't know the differences) and there's just pay for play "journals" out there too.
It's not a perfect system, and no perfect system exists where humans are involved, but still the best route for getting sci/med data out to the world.
In my opinion, the resources would be best spent in safety oriented training. This would help with the "unintentional" discharges folks have from a simple lack of understanding the fundamental rules. In theory anyway----
Maybe treat gun ownership as a normal thing and have more organized shooting sports. Simple get togethers normal folks would enjoy.
In my opinion, the resources would be best spent in safety oriented training. This would help with the "unintentional" discharges folks have from a simple lack of understanding the fundamental rules. In theory anyway----
Maybe treat gun ownership as a normal thing and have more organized shooting sports. Simple get togethers normal folks would enjoy.
That’s not the agenda.
I wish I could find the meme with the face palm and the caption "not this bullshit again".
In my opinion, the resources would be best spent in safety oriented training. This would help with the "unintentional" discharges folks have from a simple lack of understanding the fundamental rules. In theory anyway----
Maybe treat gun ownership as a normal thing and have more organized shooting sports. Simple get togethers normal folks would enjoy.
Safety training is to admit guns are acceptable and are not going away. Imagine if all training was tax deductible? There's a no lack of things that could be done to encourage safety and reduce accidents and such.
Averageman
10-04-21, 10:09
Perhaps if you went to the SPLC or Snopes web sight you'll get the truth on this.
No really, save your tax dollars, we know how this will turn out, you hate us and are using this to beat us over the head with unconstitutional laws.
I'm a White Christian Male who is a Conservative gun owner, and a military retiree, the Left hates me and the Left is running the show. You really don't need a "Study" to convince me you hate me and want my guns.
Really?
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-04-21, 10:10
Safety training is to admit guns are acceptable and are not going away. Imagine if all training was tax deductible? There's a no lack of things that could be done to encourage safety and reduce accidents and such.
I’ll do you one step better. We should have gotten federal funding for training and shooting ranges when we could. Once in place, it would be almost impossible to get rid of. What dem is going to vote against funding for gun safety training? Just make sure the range construction jobs are union and what’s a few hundred million here or there…
The_War_Wagon
10-04-21, 10:43
This could be a double edged sword. On one side, their research could prove and validate that “assault weapons” bans, magazine capacity laws, pistol braces, etc. have extremely little effect of preventing violence. On the other side, this could become an extremely biased and political study used to further the efforts to disarm Americans.
I'd BANK on the latter. :rolleyes:
In the past two years, America has placed an ungodly amount of power in the hands of the CDC.
NOT me, brudda. I trust doctors as far as I can KICK 'em, since https://i.ibb.co/G03XF40/poop3.pngbamaKare became the law of the land. :mad:
https://i2.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/lisa-simpson-its-just-as-easy-to-buy-scientists-as-it-is-to-buy-politicians.jpg?resize=518%2C389&ssl=1
I'd BANK on the latter. :rolleyes:
NOT me, brudda. I trust doctors as far as I can KICK 'em, since https://i.ibb.co/G03XF40/poop3.pngbamaKare became the law of the land. :mad:
https://i2.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/lisa-simpson-its-just-as-easy-to-buy-scientists-as-it-is-to-buy-politicians.jpg?resize=518%2C389&ssl=1
I’m certain it’s designed to be one sided to fit the narrative.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-04-21, 10:55
Not medical studies, but I know you can buy the results you want from National Labs. Well, maybe not the exact results to the tenth of a decimal point, but you’ll get the data that need to put forward the message you want.
The problem with pretty much any medical study is the population isn’t right, or they don’t actually correct for it- or they correct for it until they get the results they want. The other is that replicating the results is always hard- and that can be on Lab based studies, not even getting into studies involving people.
they will study the craps of Chicago and apply that to all of America and yeah its a epidemic
can hear the gov now we need more federal organizations to prosecute white supremacy and guns cause anyone white and has a gun is a white supremacist and needs prosecution
Firearm violence is not a disease. I suggest the Center for Disease Control study diseases.
Hahaha can hear some lefty saying that is racist :) hahahaha
Yeah idiocy beyond belief anymore :)
Firearm violence is not a disease. I suggest the Center for Disease Control study diseases.
Diamondback
10-05-21, 01:33
Hahaha can hear some lefty saying that is racist :) hahahaha
Yeah idiocy beyond belief anymore :)
To Leftards the white on paper is "systemic racism"... *snort*
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.