Dems Perpetuate Myth That “Gun Violence” Research is Prohibited

Rep Nita Lowey Gun Violence Research

courtesy no1nowhere.org

“It’s time that we give the scientists the tools to study the causes of firearm injury, in hopes that more Americans can be spared from violent suicide and firearm-related accidents,” – Rep. Nita Lowey in House GOP appropriators block funding for gun violence research [via politico.com]

comments

  1. avatar New Continental Army says:

    It’s not prohibited, in fact it’s done regularly. But the results just never match their ideology.

    1. avatar Spot On says:

      Well what is found then? Seriously.

      Or is this just another hollow conspiracy theory making a knee jerk counter accusation?

      I really don’t know.

      1. avatar Spot On says:

        I’m still here. Anyone got anything?

        1. avatar Swarf says:

          Sorry I’m late, I brought donuts.

        2. avatar DaveL says:

          Oh look, the troll waited a whole half-hour.

        3. avatar Spot On says:

          Insults & crickets.

          Come on. Somebody’s got to know something. TTAG?

        4. avatar New Continental Army says:

          Some of us have jobs and can’t respond every second, like you unemployed liberals can, who just lay around all day and troll message boards. The info is out there. I’m not going to spend the next three hours compiling data and writing a book for you. Get off your lazy ass and go do it yourself. I’ve already reads tons of studies that support this. The data stacks up against the gun controllers, and these facts are routinely reported here on TTAG from reputable sources. The most glaring being gun ownership has increased to the Nth power over the past 25 years while the crime rate exponentially dropped over the same time frame. These are facts, spot on.

        5. avatar Kyle says:

          This didn’t take long. Try just typing “Scientific Studies into firearms” into a search engine. Think more, preach less.

          I didn’t read the studies, didn’t have too. The assertion is that scientific studies aren’t being made; they clearly are. The results interest me not in the slightest. Unless or until, we wish to repeal the 2nd amendment to the constitution of the united states, such studies are merely intellectual masturbation.

          https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/03/02/589921130/science-provides-few-facts-on-effects-of-gun-policies-report-finds

        6. avatar Swarf says:

          I politely provided two links, and you’re still whinging on.

          Read, ya fuckin walnut.

        7. avatar Adam says:

          Just google Obama’s CDC gun research.

        8. avatar Swarf says:

          Now where are you?

        9. avatar CC says:

          its not prohibited. There are millions spent on it each year. CDC giving money to junk science third party researchers who work with.for gun ban lobby is.

          CDC, NIH, FBI, BJS spend millions each year on research related to gun violence.

      2. avatar jwm says:

        Last time I had bothered to look there had been hundreds, if not thousands, of studies done and not one can prove a link between firearms and violence. All these studies are immediately buried and a whole new round of studies are called for, at taxpayers expense, of course.

        Someday, somewhere these hacks are going to manipulate a study into agreeing with them, on the taxpayers dime, and they will scream from the rooftops that guns need to be banned, cause ‘proof’.

        There literally is no truth in the anti gun movement. None. And it’s finally catching up with them. They are destroying the dems chances of winning in November and they’re giving Trump two terms and the chance to load the justice system at all levels with conservative judges.

        And somehow they’re too blind to see that they are pulling down their own house of cards. It’s truly amazing to watch.

      3. avatar anonymoose says:

        In a scientific study, the CDC found that Defensive Gun Uses are closer to the high number that even Republicans refuse to quote (2-2.5 million times per year or whatever) back in 2013, and then they hid the data. Back in the 90s they banned federal funding for “research with the explicit purpose of furthering gun control,” and that’s where all this mess started. See, Leftists (especially Feminists) like to come up with these fake “studies” that have the explicit purpose of furthering whatever whackjob idea they dreamed up. It’s not about actual scientific research to them, but completely fabricating numbers that support their position. It’s like the 1 in 5 rape rate that they like to scream about- 1 out of 5 respondents on an online unscientific poll at some university years ago clicked the “I feel like I’ve been sexually assaulted before” button, when colleges are far safer than the ghetto hellholes that typically surround them, and only gender studies students probably even knew about the poll. Lately it’s like the “Blue Wave” and 2016 election polls too- they make up these numbers as propaganda and then believe it themselves and don’t actually show up to vote.

      4. avatar CC says:

        Or is this just another hollow conspiracy theory making a knee jerk counter accusation?

        John Hopkins does $30 million each year on research on “gun ‘violence’.” Harvard Injury Study center does about $4 million. That of course is inherently taxpayer funded since it is tax deducible.

        Of course CDC does research on this as well, it is clear by just typing in their search bar. So to does NIH, FBI, BJS, and dozens of government agencies.

        so yes it is another conspiracy theory on the left. CDC got in trouble after two CDC heads in the late 80’s and 1990s said they were funneling money toward research that would help lobby against the second amendment,

        http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/15/why-congress-cut-the-cdcs-gun-research-budget/

        And CDC was not banned but they were banned from giving it to 3rd party researchers who were lobbying for gun bans/control and were obviously biased.

        CDC also got in trouble for doing research claiming gun owning households had higher danger of violence. As it turns out, except for tiny, atypical sub-cohort, namely active criminals, remaining gun owning homes, ie 98% of gun owning households, s are about 30% safer from violence than homes with no guns.

        CDC funded researchers were also caught fudging numbers in many other ways.

    2. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      In 2013 then President Obama gave explicit instrutions to the CDC to study gun violence. To sum up the report in the fewest number of words… it didn’t support the gun-control narrative so it was promptly ignored.

      Scroll down to page 15 of this link: https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/3#15

      The key text to pay attention to is “…Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, ”

      At least as common. Even the CDC says that firearms save at least as many as they take.

  2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Violent suicide? Is there a peaceful suicide?

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

      “Is there a peaceful suicide?”

      Running a car in a closed garage?

      1. avatar Rincoln says:

        That’s “attacking” the environment!!!

      2. avatar anonymoose says:

        My grandparents’ neighbors died that way accidentally. They were doing it in the car with it running in their garage. My grandpa and uncles didn’t find them until a couple weeks later, in the summer heat.

        Also, my Vietnam vet second cousin intentionally gassed himself out a few years ago. 🙁

    2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Um… Ask David Carradine.

      1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        Thanks for that image this morning;-)

      2. avatar Joe R. says:

        He got whacked, like Kate Spade.

        But I keep trying to talk the evil POS (D) into leaning into their strangubation a little harder.

        1. avatar Swarf says:

          He whacked himself.

          *ba dum tsss*

      3. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        “Um… Ask David Carradine.”

        Carridine got experience coming and going at the same time…

        *snicker* 😉

    3. avatar Rdog says:

      I agree Rep Lowery is totally correct. We need to give people the tools to commit suicide peacefully. Lets band together to legalize massive overdoses of prescription meds, that way suicides will be less violent.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        She’s a lying dirty ass whore. She knows there’s plenty of money thrown at ‘gun research’ and most of it gets circuitously flowed to the evil POS (D).

        It’s just that it’s coming up on an election period. The POS (D) are flat-ass broke, they have few-to-zip candidates [able to rally behind an issue] to drum up donations. The MSM just went through a 2 year nuclear winter of no campaign money (after a large downturn in MSM advertising the previous election because Hillary damn near ran unopposed and, even with all of her Russian money to her, the (D)NC, and her ‘foundation’ she spent very little money on advertising so the MSM talking heads are dropping like flies [even a few at FOX, so they tried to golden-parachute on harassment claims]). The MSM is coming up on a weak-ass election with (R) favored in many races with not much money being spent on advertising, so the MSM is heading back into another 2 year nuclear winter, with more heads on the chopping block and more media consolidations before the 2020 elections. Huge amounts of research grant money typically gets flowed back to the evil POS (D)NC and they are just not getting enough lately to have voter precinct “walk around money” [SChitcago / New Orleans / Detroit / the Bronx / etc., etc.,] for the evil POS (D) enclaves, and they are hurting.

        Good.

        F em.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          Whore? Somebody pays her for sex acts?
          She looks more like the one who pays for it.

        2. avatar New Continental Army says:

          Not a just a whore, mind you, but an ass whore. How Despicable.

        3. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          I’m pretty sure that should be “dirty ass lying whore”

          Yes?

        4. avatar Ing says:

          Joe, you’re totally unhinged. And in this case, totally correct, although I deplore your lack of hyphenation in that stack of otherwise accurate adjectives.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Who is this “we”? You got a mouse in your pocket? These fools’ idea of research sounds a lot to me like propaganda, especially since all the questions have been asked before, and look really stupid anyway. This moron wants to investigate the causes of firearm injuries? Here ya go; wee boolit gets going really fast and hits a person’s soft stuff, oweee, it hurts! Got some more questions? Nobody has any interest in prohibiting such idiotic research, but *I*, for one, do not want my tax dollars paying for it!!!!! It is meaningless, it is idiotic, and the whole idea is to create a permanent group of gun grabbers, employed by the Feds to constantly float BS theories about unicorns and rainbows which would carry us all away if only we would make some stupid law or another. Let these morons pay for their propaganda themselves.

  3. avatar m. says:

    communists for diseased confusion (cdc) used taxpayer $$$ for “research” but did not like the results, buried it all. see muslim history of usa under ebola-bama.

  4. avatar Shire-man says:

    Literally running on a 2+2 will equal 5! platform. This is all very fun to watch yet the chance that my neighbors or coworkers buy into it gives me chills.

    1. avatar Nigel the expat says:

      Not just a chance of it happening. That is the nearly the entire progressive playbook.

  5. avatar John Q Public says:

    Just political bias to in act constitutional infringements! See by the photo op of this Woman grandstanding with her “arm tattoos” was enough to turn me off…Politcians that espouse this kind of ideology need to be completely “BAN” from holding any public office!

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      Granny methhead?

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        Shill / Whore

        getting paid to campaign for evil POS (D) money.

  6. avatar AlanInFL says:

    Science gets aakew with politics.

  7. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I’m mean. I say save the money. Spend it on Mental Health. Guns will always be used if around. Done right it’s messy but they say fast and painless??? So Ive been told.

  8. avatar No one of consequence says:

    “It’s time that we give the scientists the tools to study the causes of firearm injury,”

    Speaking as a scientist…

    Taking one meaning, I’ll need the govt to provide funding for, oh, 5 rifles and 5 pistols of various calibers, 5000 rounds per caliber (1000 x each of 5 representative bullet types), about 2000 lbs of ballistic gelatin, and assorted odds and ends like high speed cameras.

    Taking another meaning, the answer is simple: ban amateur gunsmithing, which will prevent most injuries / damage to firearms, and the subsequent owner disgust, despair and depression.

    1. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

      I think you should have 5 various sample pistols and rifles in each caliber for a more thorough investigation.

      Will you post these “scientific tests” to youtube for us non scientists to view?

      P.S. I’m available for general help and to witness your efforts. And hopefully assist in test firing.

    2. avatar Swarf says:

      I’m a bit of a scientist myself, you know.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      “It’s time that we give the scientists the tools to study the causes of firearm injury…” Gee, I thought it was bullets that cause firearm injury. Duh. Just ask an ER doctor. Probably won’t even cost you anything…

      And the answer to the question of “what causes gun violence?” is really just asking what causes violence. And we all know the answer to that. It’s called being a typical human animal. Now what causes suicides is a completely different question, but it is equally apparent that guns do not cause suicides. The worst thing you can say is that guns make suicide attempts more likely to succeed.

  9. avatar John in AK says:

    If this nice lady really, truly wants to know the causes of firearms injuries, I can tell her without equivocation that the major cause is ‘bullets.’ No, no research required: It’s ‘bullets,’ every time. Sure, the high-pressure gases have some nasty effects at very close range if there’s a tight muzzle-to-skin seal, but the really bad things are caused by those ‘bullets.’
    Now, if she wants to know WHO is the cause of firearms injuries, I can answer that, too. It’s violent people with a predisposition to hurting others due to pathologies of the brain, which is NOT the same as ‘mental illness’; Quite often, these violent people are minority males in inner cities, part of a criminal culture whose criminality is generally left undisturbed, for political reasons, by the Ruling Classes of their particular city.
    There. All of the questions are answered, and it didn’t cost a cent.

  10. avatar HEGEMON says:

    Is she flashing gang signs with those washable tats? Because, gangs, are a MAJOR source of violent firearms related deaths. Who is she affiliated with? If she got arrested by the po-po they would interview her at the jailhouse to determine if she needed to be isolated from the OTHER gang members currently in the lock-up. In their anti-gun zeal they don’t realize just how stupid they look, act and talk. If she wasn’t an elected democrat official her family might consider one of those violence restraining orders against her, you know, for the children.

  11. avatar Kenneth says:

    WTF is “Ton Nowhere”, on her arms supposed to mean? Is she saying there’s a ton of guns? Or a ton of suicides? Or is it “Nowhere Ton”, of something or another? Or is she just deranged?

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      Is that what it says?

      I see “No1 — Mow here”

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Thanx, Bill, that explains her gang tats, but leaves me with the question WTF this has to do with guns?

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          There is a perception that guns enable domestic violence. (Indeed, all violence.)
          It’s as though there was no DV before guns, and that without guns, DV would go away.
          This perception is based on the idea that guns are evil, and their influence over the weak-minded (usually characterized as Republicans or Conservatives) forces them to commit unspeakable acts.

  12. avatar C.S. says:

    I’ll take a few million to do gun violence research. This is just another example of the political graft bankrupting our country.

  13. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Yet another deranged Democrat assisting with the destruction of their own political power. They seem to have completely forgotten that the ’94 AWB cost them control of the House for the first time in forty years.

  14. avatar DaveL says:

    violent suicide and firearm-related accidents

    Translation: Excuse me as I tiptoe around criminal behavior, and any ideologically unacceptable implications that may arise therefrom.

  15. avatar A Deplorable says:

    It’s time to commit Taxpayer money to studying Liberal Lunacy/Marxist treason/Socialist sedition and finding ways to help them more effectively “pull down their own house of cards”*.

    *Borrowed from jwm above.

  16. avatar Kroglikepie says:

    Stop covering for the Left and saying “myth”. That implies unintentional misinformation or obfuscation. It’s a lie. They lie. The whole gun control movement is based on fucking lies. Period.

  17. avatar Sam I Am says:

    The relevant legislation is called “the Dickey amendment”. Language was inserted into the federal budget legislation that prohibits the CDC from conducting research where the sole and intended outcome is to promote, encourage, recommend, endorse gun control legislation; i.e lobbying. The gun control crowd wants government endorsement that declares “gun violence” is a public health issue, subject to rules and regulations about diseases and infections. Once government declares something a public health issue, incredible intrusions into the lives of individuals are justifiable as being for our own good, and to stamp out a pandemic.

    1. avatar Ardent says:

      We may be on the wrong side of this:
      If CDC finds ‘gun violence’ to be an epidemic, then logically they will move to quarantine the problem. With the ‘problem’ already confined generally to a few low income neighborhoods, isolated within major cities, where all sorts of criminality are on display (comorbid with ‘gun violence’) it seems to me that the rest of us, that is: Those disinclined to criminal behavior and lawfully in possession of our firearms, would be completely left alone, since we exhibit neither signs of infection (violence, that is) nor any of the comorbid pathologies (theft, robbery, prostitution, gang banging and retail drug sales).

      Let the research be done, but bind those who are calling for it to the conclusions and policy recommendations it will suggest Do something about poverty and criminality in the inner city (by ending open door welfare), virtually eliminate street gangs (by ending the war on drugs) and control repeat offenders, responsible for the vast majority of violent crime despite being less than 1% of population (by actually incarcerating violent offenders for real sentences, not short vacations).
      The POTG aren’t a vector for ‘gun violence’, we seem to be nearly immune. In fact, we and our ‘gun culture’ just may be the cure.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Afraid you underestimate the perfidy of government agencies. If the CDC were to declare “gun violence” to be a “public health” issue, the gun, not the virus generators, will be quarantined. The “public health” issue will be the rampant availability of the viral component, guns. As with most “epidemics” you remove the agent of dispersion in order to control the virus (gun sales).

        The undisguised intent of CDC “research of gun violence” is to eliminate legal gun ownership, everywhere. Remove the prohibition of research to promote policy, and every entity in the country (government and industry) will be limiting their liability for spreading the infection.

  18. avatar CZJay says:

    To prevent firearm negligence there needs to be information about keeping and bearing of firearms.

    Leftists want everyone to be trained before they can buy a gun and they don’t want kids to die from misuse of guns. If they actually want people to be educated, in order to stop “accidents,” there needs to be a place where young Americans get information from a professional educator at the earliest possible age. Like some kind of educational system that every American goes to for knowledge that’s taught by a teacher who understands the topic. This place can teach things like: language, mathematics, science, American history, physical education, driving education, adult education and firearm safety.

    These lessons will teach every American about how to operate a firearm and safely interact with it regardless if they never choose to own one in the future. The knowledge learned will reduce the incidents of children being hurt or killed by mishandling of a firearm and will remedy first time buyers’ ignorance of firearm ownership.

    Leftists like to say education is the key to a properly functioning democracy. If they can teach about homosexuality and transgenderism they can teach something that more people will have experience with…

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Wow. I wonder why nobody ever thought of that! Do you think perhaps the origin of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights could be worked in there somewhere, maybe along with the right to free gender reassignment surgery and where the hell that came from.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        He has a valid point, Larry.

        The Leftists are beginning to waking up to the fact that an armed public is soon to be a permanent part of America.

        And they are going to fight it at every turn. That’s why his proposal is so brilliant, let’s use the Leftist’s school system against them, as real, actual gun safety – The knowledge of how not to be hurt when handling them. It pushes all the right buttons, educating children. Use the same logic they used to push sex ed. Abstinence is a dangerous fantasy that will get kids killed. We start with K through 6 with “Stop! Don’t touch it!, etc.

        Eventually, we get to safe handling in middle-high school. We get shooting clubs back in schools, pointing to the Swiss model of recreational shooting…

        We need to exploit that…

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          Yeah, something like that.

          Between kindergarten to 6th grade they can teach kids not to play with guns and tell adults when they find one. Let them know why it’s dangerous by informing them what could happen; just like how you teach them about crossing the street, chasing a ball into the road or playing with fire.

          In middle school they can handle guns to learn the mechanics of different types of firearms. They can learn the nuances of a revolver, auto loader, lever action, bolt action, etc. This is when they can get introduced to all the firearm safety rules.

          In high school they can progress into shooting a firearm and how to properly store them. Maybe this class will be for 16 and older — seeing that kids can start learning to drive at 15 and can get a job around this age. It will be another rite of passage into adulthood.

          In college they can have classes on open and concealed carry, self defense laws, cleaning guns and medical care for gunshot wounds. They could even help people through their first gun and storage purchase.

  19. avatar SoBePhoto says:

    “Gun violence” research IS prohibited. It’s a fact, ask the CDC. That is because the results support gun ownership.

  20. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    Criminals use all types of objects to injure others including firearms. Study complete, I want my three million now.

  21. avatar American Patriot says:

    Funding should be blocked because thats a Fictitious statement guns arn’t violent….People are. If you really want to study something study why the liberal democraps seem to be the 90% + of the population that is violent.

  22. avatar kap says:

    Most democrat politicians would sell their own family into human trafficking just to garner a Vote

  23. avatar Ryan says:

    “It’s time that we give the scientists the tools to study the causes of firearm injury”

    Let me save you a few million dollars: It’s mostly bullets and the incorrect or illegal application of the trigger finger that cause firearm injury.

    1. avatar Tom D says:

      I scrolled to the end to post the same comment. It’s bullets.

      After all is said and done, more will be said than done.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email