Thought some of yall might find this interesting, and it is always good to prepare for what they'll throw at us next.  

Living with a med student, we get a lovely little magazine called JAMA, or the Journal of the American Medical Association.  The Feb edition of Jama had 2 anti gun articles in it, but the one I really want to address is called "Curbing Gun Violence: Lessons from Public Health Successes" by Drs Mozaffarian, Hemenway, and Ludwig.  Hemenway has also received funding from the Joyce Foundation in the past.

Some of us have mentioned this tactic by the left before of applying the same tactics to attacking the 2nd amendment and gun ownership that were used against smoking.  



I can just hear the grimace in his voice having to type that, because I'm sure he doesn't believe that.  

The lessons from the anti smoking campaign and other "public safety initiatives" that he wants to apply to guns?

1. Taxation of guns and ammo to fund gun safety and violence reduction programs


2. Reduce violence in media and games


3. Sustained media and educational campaign to reduce gun violence and gun suicides, including how to recognize at risk persons


4. Primary care education and counseling to increase gun safety


5. Key or security code locking devices on guns


6. Reduced magazine clip size, restrictions on rapid fire assault rifles


7. Primary care education and counselling on safe and secure storage


8. National and community based prevention programs, including hotlines for discussion potential at risk family members or friends


9. Periodic safety inspections of firearms, including documentation of home storage and safety measures


10. Smart guns with automatic security or locking devices


11. Regulations for safe storage of guns and ammo


12. Mandatory gun safety classes


13. Licensing with periodic renewal, including safety test and background check


14. Strong, active nonprofit advocacy focused on reducing gun violence

I know, there is a lot of herp and derp on that list.  You can pick individual points apart if you want, but my primary point in posting it is this: The article may claim that they don't want to demonize gun ownership like smoking and concede guns can be used safely....but they're grinding their teeth as that little lie oozes out of their mouth.  Come on, this is a Joyce Foundation funded Doc who claims he doesn't want to demonize gun ownership?  Please.  

We need to be prepared to fight back against this type of strategy.  We need to look at how they attacked smoking (taxation, demonization) and learn from it, because the same tactics will be used on us in the years to come.

My own personal suggestions?

Be an ambassador for gun rights to your family, friends, and neighbors.  If anyone expresses any interest in learning how to shoot, take them to the range and show them how safe and fun shooting is.  

Counter with facts.  They were successful in making smokers pariahs in public.  Don't scurry from the light like cockroaches, stand proud and educate people on why guns are a net positive for society.  

When someone tries to claim that guns are only good for killing people, respond with "They're also good for stopping violent crimes like rape and assault.  A gun lets a 5' 2" woman defend herself from a 6' rapist."  

I'm sure others can think of very effective strategies to fight this, and I encourage yall to share with us ways to counter this type of BS.  When/if the current legislative efforts against our gun rights fail, this will be their next mode of attack.  We need to be ready for it, and fight back.  

Wait...you write a thread title, the article goes against it, and then the rest of your post is based on your assumption the writer was full of shit?

Fuck the AMA, but damn...

Damnit

I like guns- ride motorcycles- smoke- drink...

I support our troops and hate lawyers.

Wish there was a place I could live where I could be free..

*flagged by Obama-bot; reported to government for re-education training*

Read the article yourself and tell me if you think he believes in the 2nd amendment and supports gun ownership.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1556167

The title and the article don't disagree at all.  The author wants to use the same tactics that were used to reduce smoking (taxation and anti smoking campaigns) to reduce "gun violence".  

It won't be long before we might see govt funded *truth* ads with stupid kids lying on the street in front of the NRA or S&W headquarters representing "gun deaths" instead of "smoking deaths".  

ETA:  Did you even look at the list of proposals?  

I'll pass.  I get enough drivel in the AAP rags.

If you're not going to read it, maybe you shouldn't make assumptions about my own understanding of the article.  

Sheesh.  

My comment was based soley on your post and its content.  Re-read it.

That said, I don't really care, and I'm not going to argue about it.

Cool.  Thanks for your insightful and valuable contribution to the thread.  

Ummmm.... Is a 6 inch rapist that much of a threat?  

Damn it.

Depends on where he puts that 6 inches?  

No problem.  I do what I can.

Ask the gaps between your toes how they feel about that.

Another nanny state initiative from a power hungry organization. Shocking.

Not a gun guy...but Adam Carolla's been comparing the two for years.  

Almost all the things I enjoy doing woul dprobably be flagged as unhealthy and dangerous by the powers that be....but isn't that what freedom and personal accountability is all about?

Thanks for posting, good video.

He's not on our side at all when it comes to guns. But he's at least honest enough to say he understands the argument.





 

The argument that guns=smoking is such an amateur logical fallacy, it would be destroyed by even the most liberal professor in an ethics or reasoning class.

Do government agents use smoking to protect themselves from harm?

Will the government take the lead and ban carrying of firearms by those it has control over, like FBI, anyone inside Federal Buildings, IRS agents, etc.?

Weak and worthless argument is for brainwashed children trained in public screwels.

The reason they don't teach ethics in public school is because the leftists parade non-violence as their banner, then applaud the government for evicting home-owners from their dwellings for not paying their salaries via property taxes.

Yep, but the same tactics will be used so it is important to learn from.

And frankly, enough Americans were dumb enough to give Obama a second term, so an argument being stupid isn't good enough to kill it anymore.  Not sure how we can fight back against stupidity.  

Just thought others might be interested in the proposals against "gun violence" these folks are pushing for.  

I saw another thread today where some law maker was trying to push "home inspections" for assault rifle owners.  Hmm, that seems to be on this list.