NRA, Congress stymied CDC gun research budget

(CBS News) On Monday, President Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control to begin research on the causes of gun violence. That was something that Congress specifically prevented the CDC from doing.

"There is absolutely no question. These are preventable deaths," said Dr. Mark Rosenberg, who used to oversee research into gun violence and prevention at the Centers for Disease Control.

In 1996, the NRA successfully lobbied Congress to put this restriction into the CDC's budget: "None of the funds made available ... may be used to advocate or promote gun control."

"These were shots fired across the bow," said Rosenberg, "and they the terrorized people at the CDC. And they terrorized researchers who said, 'Whoa, this is scary. I don't want my funding jeopardized.'"

9 in 10 back universal gun background checks
NRA president: Gun control measures "feel-good proposals that won't work"
NRA: We didn't get a chance to oppose N.Y. law
Poll: 6 in 10 favor tougher gun laws

The NRA was infuriated with a 1993 study sponsored by the CDC that concluded having a gun at home offered little protection, but it increased almost three-fold the risk of one family member shooting another.

CDC funding into gun violence research has plummeted 96 percent since 1996, to just $100,000 of last year's $5.6 billion CDC budget.

Asked if gun violence a legitimate public health issue Bob Barr, a former Georgia congressman who sits on the board of the NRA, responded, "Absolutely not."

Barr added: "The issue of firearms violence is handled and ought to be handled as a law enforcement matter. We don't need government involved in this. It is all about the big C: control."

The next step is up to Congress whether to approve President Obama's request for $10 million to study this issue of gun violence.

[areyoukiddingme40]

It seems a little goofy to study a type of murder or an instrument of murder. Dead is dead and there are worse ways to be killed than shot. Harvard did an exhaustive study in 2007 that found Russia had 4 times the murder rate of the U.S. not as many gun murders but does that matter? They found universally across the globe that more gun restrictions are linked to more violent crime. These people are grandstanding. The weapons they want to ban are responsible for fewer murders and violent crime than contact weapons like tire irons and bats. or knives or even manual strangulation. Guns that are used more often in violent crime are much easier to conceal. It also doesn't take 10 million bucks to verify the legitimacy, once and for all, of the extensive research done by the private sector on both sides of this issue! The whole story is out there and 100,000 should be enough to convert the NRA VS. Brady Bunch arguments into plain English and RAW data for the rest of us. If the CDC number crunchers could/would do it without any bias I would be happy to pay my share. I have a feeling that the side that gets exposed as a fraud will accuse the CDC of having their own agenda though and it will be another $100,000 of China's money down the drain.

[TimeToEvolve]

What a shock, private industry and their paid slaves in Congress hiding research. What else has Wall Street hidden from us except everything?

[WhereisOT]

"gun appreciation day"....proudly sponsored by american third position...

"The american third position exists to represent the political interests of white Americans"
"We want an America that is recognizable to us, one that we can feel comfortable in"

"feel comfortable in"? The racists be dumb, hate filled + nervous....
Never a good combo..

And let the Peoples Government (the enemy) come...we be "ready"
Which the Peoples Government won't unless the lunatics are endangering the lives of Innocents....but the Government is coming to get your guns sh*t sells more guns..

Why since these beyond cowards, who spew hate, threats, idiocy to sell more guns...(nra)....why don't they speak a little logic to their radical followers and the like...

Common sense, if you prove what you are...if you prove you are a threat to We The People...the "enemy" just might come....So ya got's a house full of fricken guns...say 50...say thats just the long guns with boxes of ammo.....there's 10 "patriots/warriors" in the militia pack in a shack or hole or compound...

Most heros ain't like rambo with machine guns firing in both hands..So accurate as to hit a fly in the a$$ at 50 paces...
rambo IS not real...its just a stupid flick...

Anyhow say all 10 warriors fill both hands with "freedom"..
Lets see....Thats 20 freedoms in use..
When the smoke clears, the wet dream fantasy of taking the Country back is shattered by 1 well placed shot on each domestic terrorist..

Talk about being taken to the cleaners..
The investment in all that firepower, only able to make noise with a bit of the arsenal..
And...you're dead...Be a "top story" for a couple days in the news..
Maybe seen as "hero's" in the eyes of other fanatics..then soon forgotten..
Why...because you're dead....and because of how and "why" you died....heroic
Not so much...

[old_new_englander]

Bob Barr says that government shouldn't be involved with law enforcement. (Yes, he does--see above, or watch the video if you didn't catch it.) That is the kind of nonsense that extremists of the pro-gun lobby are spouting. I'm sure there is similar silliness on the other side of the issue. If we are going to make progress, then reasonable people on both sides have to take over the debate.

[Bob19694999]

Personally I would rather see the funds at the Center for DISEASE control used for research into DISEASE. The Spanish Flu of 1918 was responsible for 50 million deaths in a few short month. I fear that much more than the guns locked away in my gun safe jumping out and shooting me. The study they did was biased and included gun suicides (the number one method males use to commit suicide in the US). Suicide has surpassed car accidents as the No. 1 cause of injury-related death in the United States, according to a 2012 study. You use that in your numbers, you can inflate the numbers easily. Why not use gun HOMICIDE? Oh, cause you do that is is hard to make the case against guns. You have 600 million guns in the US and the number keeps growing, but the homicide RATES are down. Even mass shooting are FLAT. They peaked in 1929, and have no up trend since.

[KPeters_from_UK]

Please tell me you're not saying that the CDC is putting research dollars into gun control opposed to flu research. Silly it isn't taking any resources away from disease research. They are looking into because it guns are sometimes used for murder and suicide...usually used by mentally ill people.


Gun owners are 40% likely to be a victim of their own gun.

[RLEmery]

You mention the New England Journal of Medicine study ("Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home", Arthur L. Kellerman, New Eng. J. Med., June 12, 1986).

First, it suggested that handguns are 43 times (not 47 times) more likely to kill a family member. But that's an intentionally skewed study. Of the 43 deaths reported, 37 (86%) were due to suicide. It's quite arguable that someone committed to killing themselves would likely do it anyway that found possible, regardless of laws.

Other deaths in the study included criminal activity between family members (drug deals gone bad, etc.).

Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug dealers, and violent spouses committing assault. So, this "43 times" thing doesn't mean innocent family members are getting killed while criminals aren't, as that "fact" would have you believe.

Additionally, the author of the study INTENTIONALLY didn't include cases in which burglars or intruders were wounded or frightened away. This study was conceived to reach a desired result, and of course that's what it did.

Academically fraudulent lies arent good or valid science, they are only lies hence they are irrelevant to th real world.

That is why the CDC got its arse kicked, for posting biased unscientific lies, dont like it, too bad UK troll.

Hey here is a study the didnt pay for, but used the data from a National INstitute of Justice study that hasnt been refuted or demonstrated to have falsely manipulated data to achieve a predetermined result.


Were you aware of this study? It's not done by a pro-gun think-tank , it's the CDC.

"Estimating intruder-related firearm retrievals in U.S. households, 1994."

The CDC estimated that "497,646 incidents occurred in which the intruder was seen and reportedly scared away by the firearm... "

And that is an annual number.

Almost 500k defensive uses of a gun in one year, only in homes. So you going to prove not one single violent crime is committed outside the home, lol!

Many defenses uses of guns are never reported because the defender simply shows the gun and the criminal ceases.

ncbi . nlm . nih . gov / pubmed / 9591354

Really sucks when your own anti gun pundits start putting up numbers you cant refute.

[Frekls]

To RLEmery, The nature of science is that the discussion plays out using research, which is so much more reliable than opinion. What about these more recent articles by a research group at the Harvard School of Public Health? Household Firearm Ownership and Rates of Suicide http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abstract/2007/04000/Household_Firearm_Ownership_and_Rates_of_Suicide.31.aspx or Risks and Benefits of a Gun in the Home (CDC) http://ajl.sagepub.com/content/5/6/502.full

I haven't seen articles that discuss cases in which burglars or intruders were wounded or frightened away. I would love to see the methodology used as well as the results. Do you have a credible peer-reviewed article for that? Or, are people's opinions based on "feelings?"

[Frekls]

Let me re-try those links (typing too fast)
Household Firearm Ownership and Rates of Suicide Across the 50 United States (Harvard School of Public Health) http://******/Zr8eUi
Risks and Benefits of a Gun in the Home (Harvard School of Public Health) http://******/Zr8eUihttp://******/Wg1l28

[Frekls]

ugh, cbsnews doesn't like bit . ly Where there are asterisks, it should say "******" (the url shortener) (or if that's stripped out and replaced with asterisks, "bit . ly" minus the spaces. Sorry for the triple posting.

[1988JAck]

What are you afriad of in the stats, Bob?

[WhereisOT]

Huh...among the many Human Beings out there...
The insane racist barr was the chosen 1 to spew bs..."Absolutely not."
So many to choose from....this should paint a clear picture...

"barr gave the keynote speech at a white supremacist council of conservative citizens (ccc) national convention in 1998"

These old white "brave warriors" best get going on what they yearn for..
The pathetic cowardly evil slithering on this earth...can't slither here forever...
Gotta move on to what awaits..and it ain't "good"

[WhereisOT]

"The NRA was infuriated with a 1993 study sponsored by the CDC that concluded having a gun at home offered little protection, but it increased almost three-fold the risk of one family member shooting another"

Like the I didn't know or better yet "think" the killing machine was loaded preventable deaths...
Like the shell in chamber, safety off weapon within a Childs reach deaths..
Like the alcohol/drug fueled arguments that ends with a shooting...
Like the domestic violence...man shoots woman or vise versa...then the murder trial follows..
Like the down and out Soldier, with no one to listen, to understand, to help..

And on and on..

Weapons for killing are not "toys"...
Shouldn't have to look far and wide for Voices of reason, for common sense when it comes to guns....
Why is something so simple, so right...is seen as wrong in the "minds" of the gun pushers...Only fricken insane evil would stand against anything and everything that would save Lives...

[RLEmery]

You mention the New England Journal of Medicine study ("Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home", Arthur L. Kellerman, New Eng. J. Med., June 12, 1986).

First, it suggested that handguns are 43 times (not 47 times) more likely to kill a family member. But that's an intentionally skewed study. Of the 43 deaths reported, 37 (86%) were due to suicide. It's quite arguable that someone committed to killing themselves would likely do it anyway that found possible, regardless of laws. Other deaths in the study included criminal activity between family members (drug deals gone bad, etc.).

Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug dealers, and violent spouses committing assault. So, this "43 times" thing doesn't mean innocent family members are getting killed while criminals aren't, as that "fact" would have you believe.

Additionally, the author of the study INTENTIONALLY didn't include cases in which burglars or intruders were wounded or frightened away. This study was conceived to reach a desired academically fraudulent result, and of course that's what it did.

Were you aware of this study? It's not done by a pro-gun think-tank , it's the CDC.

"Estimating intruder-related firearm retrievals in U.S. households, 1994."

The CDC estimated that "497,646 incidents occurred in which the intruder was seen and reportedly scared away by the firearm... "

And that is an annual number.

Almost 500k defensive uses of a gun in one year, only in homes. So you going to prove not one single violent crime is committed outside the home, lol!

Many defenses uses of guns are never reported because the defender simply shows the gun and the criminal ceases.

ncbi . nlm . nih . gov / pubmed / 9591354

Really sucks when your own anti gun pundits start putting up numbers you cant refute.

[bones1944]

I'm an independent and there is not a poll in the world that I would believe. watching all the polls before the last election showed me that none of these overpaid morons know what they are talking about. I know a lot of Republicans and they all believe in evolution, they all believe the world is 4 billion years old, they happen to believe in modern science as much as you'r progressive Democratic friends. to smear the whole party because of a few wild eyed religious fanatics is a mistake. It would be like smearing the whole Democratic party because some of its members are wild eyed fanatical communist.

[davidd5063]

No one is "smearing" anyone or anything. When the GOP steps up and admits that the world is 4B years old and tells their Fox News addicted minions to quit attacking science, then you have a right to complain. You cannot get into bed with batshit CRAZY, behave like terrorist with batshit CRAZY to get a tax cut (after all that IS all that matters to ALL GOP garbage) and then try to claim it's "fringe" elements when it's the VAST MAJORITY of your party. Sorry Charlie, you lie about welfare, you lie about elections, you'll do anything and say anything to avoid paying taxes, so you're just as much a terrorist as a Fox News addicted patsy.

[jamesdickason]

CDC--Odd place to park gun control. Kind of puts all this into the "Mental" issue area--

[CBSDebbie]

So tired of these radical groups. NRA, those who believe rape is from God, those who believe they know best for people's religious beliefs (Catholic Church, Family Researcg Council, etc) As a Republican for over 35 years I can no longer put up with the fringe of the party. Time to dump these nut cases in the party.

[rzarc2]

Maybe it's time to leave the party. Become Independent like me. Then you can trash both sides with impunity when they do something stupid.