Comments on: NRA, Congress stymied CDC gun research budget
Add a Comment
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- First off, let me say that this article is not telling you the entire truth. The CDC is an not a gun friendly place and let's be frank, they are not criminologists. They investigate ebola, the flu, and other issues.
We should be asking the experts, and those in industry, about crime. Not a bunch of doctors who should be focused on treating diseases, and allegories aside, crime is not a disease. If there were no laws, there would be no crime. We need to be tasking the criminologists with this job, BUT THE VAST MAJORITY WILL TELL YOU, gun control cannot be shown to work. The only ones that have that position are...
You guessed it, the CDC. - Reply to this comment
- Why should we study gun control, we can't verify whether the 2nd Amendment was written by ... mentally ills at the time when drinking could consciously be used to cover up that illness? We still see that a lot of soldiers are still using it today.
- Reply to this comment
- One of the things the NRA is pushing is that mental health in America has been to lax and does not help the people who are committing these mass killings. I'm sure they would support a CDC role in this aspect of the gun control debate. However, as soon as the data gets to close to hitting the real truth that stymies their propaganda they want to cry foul. You can't have it both ways. As for me, keep your guns, I just want the government to SEVERELY limit who gets them.
- Reply to this comment
- The NRA does not offer solutions other than more guns.
If there are so many guns, as many as people, should that not be enough to stop a massacre?
How many more guns must be added?
Do they have a number? - Reply to this comment
- Idiocracy
- Reply to this comment
- Typical of Congressional Republicans to block funding for research, even when it could save the lives of thousands of innocent people. Faced with the truth, they cover their ears and scream: "We don't want to know! You can't make us!"
- Reply to this comment
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
