Skip to comments.Obama takes a shot at guns
Posted on 10/21/2009 9:45:31 PM PDT by JohnRLott
For a decade, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been forbidden by Congress from doing research on gun-control issues. Such piddling hurdles as federal law don't matter to the Obama administration.
With a wave of a hand, the CDC has simply redefined gun-control research so the ban no longer applies. They're not researching guns; they're researching alcohol sales and their impact on gun violence, or researching how teens carrying guns affect the rates of non-gun injuries. "These particular grants do not address gun control; rather they deal with the surrounding web of circumstances," wrote National Institutes of Health (NIH) spokesman Don Ralbovsky.
Gun-control advocates claim that banning the CDC from examining gun control amounts to a gag order on science. After all, what can be wrong with further scientific inquiry? But the issue isn't about scientific inquiry. It is whether government resources should be used to promote an ideological agenda. . . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
First open gun grab will be the 2nd shot heard around the world.
Obozo had better beware. Actions have consequences.
And probably not the consequences he may think about.
I guess this answers that article about gunowners thinking this admin might take a shot at guns
John R Lott
That names sounds vaguely familiar =o)
someone once said it take alot to get us mad but once mad we have a temper that takes action just ask Japan and Nazi Germany.
did you see this great article?
Will the CDC do a study on the health hazards of gun confiscation?
They would be the same poltroons who put a gag order on anyone who disputes their claim that climate change is man made.
That study might give them some interesting results.
To the Rethinking AIDS/Rethinking Public Health Ping List.
This was an interview on the CDC and the phony “War on AIDS” that veered into the CDC and gun control. See my profile page for more:
RETHINKING: There is so much more of this on the tapes and in your book. But you told me recently that the CDC is trying to define violence and gun-related crimes as clusters of epidemic disease.
ELLISON: That’s right. Violence of course they are not calling an infectious disease, but they are trying to treat it as a disease with perhaps some kind of environmental cause. They think they can cure violence by two measures primarily. One is gun control; they think if you get rid of the guns, then the gangs of course will stop purchasing their automatic weapons through the underground. And second, that if you fund the gangs and their organizations, their front groups, that are creating riots and violence, that you will then induce them to become peaceful.
RETHINKING: Where did you get that from?
ELLISON: This is from articles published by CDC officers themselves, who are not outlining their strategy for, quote, “how to stop the epidemic of violence.” They believe that because it’s an epidemic or disease that it shouldn’t be punished. You shouldn’t fill up the jails with these people, or death row. Rather you should give them money and take everyone else’s guns.
“they’re researching alcohol sales and their impact on gun violence”
I’ve always said that the BATF was in charge of a weird combination of items.
First it was demonizing guns, then tobacco and now alcohol.
Will the limo libs rise up in rage when their Dom Perignon is taken from their cold, drunk hands?
They’ll have reached their conclusions before their “research” and make the data support their “findings”.
As long as they have enough suckers on the hook they don't belive they will lose any of that.
I predict that they would find high mortality rates. Few survivors.
PS May I suggest reading the entire link to see how the CDC secretly funds radical front groups and manufactures phony epidemics, such as the “epidemic of violence.”
Again, see my profile page for more. See especially, the Hidden Agenda Behind HIV.
The fact that the CDC believes that puts me at a loss for words.
That is so far beyond 'stupid' it is really hard to quantify.
You are the Disease, I am the Cure.
Not just stupid, but subversive...the CDC has become a subversive organization.
Obamao’s arrogance is going to get the best of him when he goes after our guns. You know he wants to, but he and the radical left know it isn’t politically feasible right now.
We have woken a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve.
Yes, you are right. Just that one thought alone is horribly subversive. What better way to proliferate gangs and riots than to pay them to exist?
He’ll try to ban gun ownership via universal government healthcare.
Eventually you’ll need psych exams to even possibly get one.
They will start banning them based on risks to your health. Lead, potential accidental injury, injuring others, etc.
At the same time making the world safer for criminals and government thugs.
Now imagine the entire health care industry run by the government and no one within it can lobby for their interests or their clients interests. Neat way to gag businesses that account for 1/16th of our GDP and caters to the needs of almost all Americans.
They used to call it “Danegeld.”
And whatever they reward, they get more of. But simple cause and effect are apparently beyond these over-educated prigs.
It's not unlike giving grants to their base of global warmists. Passing laws is another matter.
Mr. Lott, are you missing a byline?
I have the "black gun disease"!
seems like they ought to have better things to do with their time and my money.
I've posted it before, and here I go again:
Obama is a Lincoln admirer, and I think he wants to go after conservatives the way Lincoln went after the South: provoke, provoke, provoke -- kerblooey! And then declare insurrection with Congress in recess, and put the Army on foot in a civil war of his own devising.
A recent bio of John Quincy Adams suggests that it may have been Adams who thought up the idea of civil war as a way around the Constitution. He, like Lincoln after him, recognized the Gordian knot of achieving Northern industrial and political aims at the expense of the South constitutionally: there was, as Lincoln said in a letter in 1855, just no way to overcome and reorganize the South constitutionally. So the answer was to create extraordinary circumstances that would allow a president of the right disposition to solve all outstanding issues between the North and South once and for all, by use of the war power, to "suppress insurrection".
Remember, Adams was in the House of Representatives until his death in the 1840's .... long enough to meet the young Lincoln. So that may be how the Civil War started, with an idea passed from a grand old man and ex-president to a younger politician with the intellect and character to make the idea real.
So my warning is, Obama will seek an insurrection at some point, in order to be able to command the Army to kill vast numbers of conservatives and disarm and disenfranchise the survivors, as the survivors of the Confederacy were disenfranchised.
"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
- Noah Webster An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787
Except that it won’t work this time around. All the industrial power and all the firearms are in the South/conservative camp this time. And I don’t think he’s smart enough to realize this.
"Hey, there's something you don't like? Something you want? Something you want others to be forced to do? Something you want others to be forced not to do? Get your state to do it or do it yourselves under the laws of your state. Your life will be what you make of it, not what you try to get us to make of it with the money from the guy down the block.
"You're a governor and want the people of your state to have more welfare benefits? Then tax the citizens and businesses of your own state to pay for it and enjoy the consequences of having welfare hopefuls stream into your state and businesses and productive individuals stream out.
"You're a mayor of a big city and your state government won't give you all the money you want? Then figure out a way to deal with it yourself. Levy an income tax on the residents of the city and watch what happens as a result of your own actions. We won't be there to bail you out. It's live and let die. You've got to politically reap what you politically sow.
"You want to save 20,000 acres you say are home to some endangered toad? Then get off your butts and start collecting the money to buy and maintain the land to promote maximum toad health. Don't expect someone else to do it for you because you bitch loudly enough in the courts about it.
" You want everybody in the entire nation to have health insurance? Then get off your butts and start donating your own money to buy it for them or start raising money by convincing others through moral suasion that they should give. Don't expect someone else to do it for you because you think you can use the power of the federal government to coerce other people into paying for what you think is a good idea. Maybe it is a good idea. But if you can't convince everyone to do it, then do what you can with your own resources. You don't have any right to pay for your good deeds by spoliating the money and property of others. Might doesn't make right and thinking you're right doesn't mean you can dip into the pockets of others to pay for your brilliant ideas.
"As federal officials, we have our work very narrowly and very clearly defined in the Constitution and we're going to stick to that. Anything else is your own lookout."
Something on this subject was mentioned on another thread.
The poster tied it into the MANDATORY OBAMACARE.
Do you smoke?? Your Obamacare premiums are AUTOMATICALLY HIGHER due to the increased chances of becoming sick.
Overweight?? Higher premiums await you under Obamacare due to the increased risk of health related issues such as diabetes and heart disease.
Here’s the kicker!!
After this “study”.....
Own a FIREARM?? Your premiums will be HIGHER due to your chances of becoming killed or injured due to you owning a firearm vs someone who does not.
This study will PROVE IT, and the gun grabbers will run with it, just like the fines under “cap and tax” that are coming with “excess use” of energy, you (AND YOUR FAMILY) as a “gun owner” will be an “increased health risk” and have higher “health premiums” that THEY will determine.
IMHO, it’s gonna be in the “fine print”.
One way to REALLY get it rolling,(divide and conquer) is to charge your “non-gun owning” neighbors a higher premium because they live next to a “gun owner” and are therefore more likely to become a “victim” in this “study” also........
It should be “interesting”.
Statistical support will be wrenched out of their studies the same as any group’s agenda will render statistical support to “prove” their point of view as truth, even to the point that opposing viewpoints will be supported by the same research. It’s just a matter of crunching the numbers into “facts”. I’m sure many people are paid well to distort...err...discover that groups with agendas were right all along.
This is the WHOLE POINT behind getting control of the medical care system -
to be able to punish behavior which the left doesn’t approve of.
minor correction, health care is about 1/6 of our GDP. Frregards.
Very interesting hypothesis. I have seen pieces of this bounced around before. But not all together. You have prompted me to do some research.
Will the CDC do a study on the health hazards of infected Gays with the HIV virus ??
Well, the thing is I lost all my guns in a tragic boating/biplane accident. I hear those are rife nowadays.
Oh. You mean like gang-bangers and criminals?
The CDC's brazen end run around restrictions on gun-control research is hardly surprising given that when President Obama served on the board of the Joyce Foundation, it was the largest private funder of gun-ban research in the country
No surprises here.
Where he going to get the army? Our army is dominated by conservative leaning people, they won’t do it. Getting 5 million libs to volunteer might be possible, but getting them to carry guns and kill people? I don’t think so.
I really think we, FR, need to focus on the MSM. Force them back to the middle, demand un-biased reporting. That would insure these communists are rendered ineffective in 2010.