In another forum, someone psoted this...

2) For years the NRA used their political clout to keep the CDC from producing ANY studies on gun deaths. When they were finally permitted to, they were constrained to asking only NRA vetted questions. In any study, the results you get depend on the questions you ask. The CDC depends on Congress for its money, and has to do its bidding. The NRA lobby has worked hard to make sure the CDC conduct no studies that might produce any negative information on gun safety. So the CDC unfortunately cannot be considered an unbiased source. I know nothing about the methods used by the DoJ in gathering data and framing questions, but I suspect they, too, feel political pressure and can't act totally independently. The fact that government agencies are forced to buckle under to this kind of political pressure should concern all of us, regardless of what side we are on. It was, after all, the immense pressure exerted on our intelligence agencies by people in the Bush administration that led to the production of unreliable reports on WMD in Iraq.

I asked for a link to prove this - nothing yet.

But its heartwarming to know Wayne Lapierre actually runs America thru a  shadow gov't.  

I Am The NRA!

Wow!
Pulling out all the stops eh?
Or is this just another way to make it Bush's fault?

It's a conspiracy!

sigh....

more people to hate.

I am consistently amazed at the pure rabid stupidity that is rampant in this country. These people are literally functional idiots. How they make it through a day is beyond me. Really.


SG

Idiot. It was the Clinton administration that produced the "unreliable reports".

Quoted: It's a conspiracy!

It's a ...........
WWAS?

Quoted: I am consistently amazed at the pure rabid stupidity that is rampant in this country. These people are literally functional idiots. How they make it through a day is beyond me. Really. SG

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WHAT HE SAID ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ hinking.gif

Were it only true.

I have a hard time figuring out what type of  "disease" a gunshot wound is.

Let the DOJ handle such data. The CDC should work on controlling diseases, not guns.

Idiot. It was the Clinton administration that produced the "unreliable reports".

Da_Bunny is right.  Apparently, under the Clinton administration the CDC was heavily politicized & they started putting out "studies" that purported to show how bad guns were.  As a result Congress prohibited them from using any appropriated funds for those studies.

Neal Knox wrote a couple of articles about it, so you may be able to find something on his website.

I have nothing to do with this conspiracy.

Quoted: I am consistently amazed at the pure rabid stupidity that is rampant in this country. These people are literally functional idiots. How they make it through a day is beyond me. Really. SG

+1

and the opening post details the classic behaviour - the Facts don't support the guy's politics so he invents / grabs a conspiracy theory that explains away the disconnect between his theories and Reality.

It's a failure of our Society that we allow this kind of unthinking conspiracy crap to be fostered in our education system.
It's a failure of our Society that we don't practice a little selective euthanasia on morons like these conspiracy-minded fools.

Quoted: I heard that while Kerry was in 'Nam he worked for the CDC producing the truth but W while absent from the TANG was working for the NRA spreading pro-gun propaganda.

I thought Bush was working away his AWOL time in the National Guard at a tinfoil factory, installing hole punchers on the rollers so the Govt can still listen in on the tinfoil-hatters.

Quoted: Quoted: I am consistently amazed at the pure rabid stupidity that is rampant in this country. These people are literally functional idiots. How they make it through a day is beyond me. Really. SG ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WHAT HE SAID ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

They're only making it easier for the "enemies" - and they think they're doing good. Nah, they know exactly what they're doing.

Quoted: Idiot. It was the Clinton administration that produced the "unreliable reports". Da_Bunny is right.  Apparently, under the Clinton administration the CDC was heavily politicized & they started putting out "studies" that purported to show how bad guns were.  As a result Congress prohibited them from using any appropriated funds for those studies. Neal Knox wrote a couple of articles about it, so you may be able to find something on his website.

Bingo.

Cool. With that kind of power I am somewhat suprised that there are any restrictions of our firearms at all.

CDC to Study if Gun Laws Prevent Violence

NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, Oct. 3, 2003

ATLANTA - A sweeping federal review of the nation's gun control laws — including mandatory waiting periods and bans on certain weapons — found no proof such measures reduce firearm violence.

The review, released Thursday, was conducted by a task force of scientists appointed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC said the report suggests more study is needed, not that gun laws don't work. But the agency said it has no plans to spend more money on firearms study.

Some conservatives have said that the CDC should limit itself to studying diseases, and some have complained in the past that the agency has used firearms-tracking data to subtly push gun control. In fact, since a 1996 fight in Congress, the CDC has been prohibited from using funds to press for gun control laws.

Since then, the task force reviewed 51 published studies about the effectiveness of eight types of gun-control laws. The laws included bans on specific firearms or ammunition, measures barring felons from buying guns, and mandatory waiting periods and firearm registration. None of the studies were done by the federal government.

In every case, a CDC task force found "insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness."

"I would not want to speculate on how different groups may interpret this report," said Dr. Sue Binder, Director of CDC's Center for Injury Prevention and Control. "It's simply a review of the literature."

Most of the studies were not funded by the CDC. Gun-control advocates quickly called on the government to fund better research.

A spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said the laws work, but it is nearly impossible to prove it because people can buy guns in one state and carry them into one of the handful of states with strong antigun measures.

"It's hard to study whether gun control laws work in this country because we have so few of them," said Peter Hamm. "Talking about studying gun control in this country is like talking about studying democracy in Iraq."

The National Rifle Association said it needed more time to review the report before commenting on it.

Second Leading Cause of Injury Death

Firearms injuries were the second leading cause of injury deaths, killing 28,663 people in 2000, the most recent year for which data was available. About 58 percent of the deaths were suicides. Gun accidents claimed about 775 lives that year.

About the only conclusion the task force could draw from the surveys was that mandatory waiting periods reduced gun suicides in people over 55. But even that reduction was not big enough to significantly affect gun suicides for the overall population.

The task force complained that many of the studies were inconsistent, too narrow, or poorly done.

"When we say we don't know the effect of a law, we don't mean it has no effect. We mean we don't know," said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, chairman of the CDC task force. "We are calling for additional high-quality studies."

Among the problems:

Studies on firearm bans and ammunition bans were inconsistent. Some showed the bans decreased violence; others found the bans actually increased violence. Many firearm bans grant exemptions to people who already owned the weapons, making it hard to tell how well a ban worked. Other evidence showed that firearms sales go up right before bans take effect.

Studies on background checks were also inconsistent, with some showing decreased firearm injuries and others showing increased injuries. A major problem with those studies, the report said, was that "denial of an application does not always stop applicants from acquiring firearms through other means."

Only four studies examined the effectiveness of firearm registration on violent outcomes, and all of the findings were again inconsistent.

Too few studies have been done on child-access gun laws to gauge their effectiveness.

Study periods often are too narrow to tell whether gun laws work. The task force noted that "rates of violence may affect the passage of firearms laws, and firearms laws may then affect rates of violence."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/10/2/203149.shtml