Posted on 03/08/2019 5:01:53 AM PST by richardb72
Democrats in the U.S. House are likely to approve spending $50 million in taxpayer funds for public health research on gun violence. While that may sound like a good idea at first glance, it really wouldn’t do anything to reduce gun violence in our country.
I testified Thursday before the House Appropriations Committee’s health subcommittee to inject facts into the discussion of the Democratic bill.
It should go without saying that everyone opposes gun violence. But it’s important to take effective measures to deal with this problem and not simply take actions that sound appealing but won’t really save lives.
The idea behind the $50 million in research funding is to have medical professionals apply tools they developed to study cancer, heart disease and other diseases and use them to study crime, accidental death and suicide. But to state the obvious, gun violence and diseases are two very different things.
The National Rifle Association – regularly demonized in the media and by many Democrats – has been blamed for preventing academics from doing research on firearms. So supporters of the bill that would spend $50 million to research gun violence as a public health issue say their bill is needed to stop the NRA from blocking vital research that will save lives.
But there’s a big problem with the argument: it’s not true. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Basically, if these research groups did do health research into gun violence, and documented mental behavior case study....what it’d drive is citizens to push for states to formally put nutcases (as we did prior to the 1960s) into state mental facilities. I think if you just asked a straight question to the general public....more than sixty percent would readily agree to putting disturbed people away who are deemed a threat.
I doubt if that’s the intention of the anti-gun crowd, but such data on the table would drive public opinion on this.
50 million to hire consultants to Justify what they want to hear.
MSM will treat their findings as the gospel
The end result justifies the means for them.
Like eating a good steak and eating polluted lettuce. coming to the conclusion that eating steak makes you crap your pants.
In other words, they want $50M. The research, they’ll make up anyway.
Liberal ‘academia’ all have a needle in their arm called ‘The US Government’.
All the while, detesting taxpaying American Conservatives with an intensity that could incinerate hell.
I’d do it for the low, low price of $25 million. Why pay more?
Executive summary:
Guns bad.
Orange man bad.
White man bad.
Christians bad.
Thing is though... This gun/health study has been done before several times with the same results, and the results were surprisingly honest. The results were not what they wanted to hear at all so now they are going to try and pay for new more favorable results.
Maybe his prospective is looking out of his own keister..
This will be one of these studies which will confirm preconceived conclusions, like climate change, second hand smoke and the “glass ceiling “. No effort will be made to be fair or objective, and whoever accepts money to do the study will understand exactly what is expected of them.
They want to take guns from non-violent people and leave them in the hands of violent criminals.
It’s their next shot (pun intended) in a propaganda campaign against the 2A.
“Progressives.” They‘re still at it.
“Putting science in its rightful place,” as EX resident bathhouse barry soetero obeyme once told us. And remember, as with Trofim Lysenko, science, in service to the state, will DO what the state TELLS it to do. Or else.
We are dealing with autocrats, control freaks, authoritarians here, people. From Nanny Pelosi’s dictate of ten years ago “we have to vote for the bill before we can see what’s in it” to Al Occasional Cortex’s “I’m the boss” of just a few weeks ago.
THIS is how these progressive/democrats/liberals/socialists/communists/tyrants position themselve, are showing themselves who they truly are.
And Americans keep electing them; or don’t, we’ll never fully know the extent of illegal alien voting and overt voter fraud, ballot box stuffing (anyone else recall that cache of prefilled Hillary Clinton ballots found in the warehouse in Ohio in 2016? Tens of thousands of them?)
But this, this is how we got the proverbial, and wrong, “global warming scientist concensus”.
No concensus, just hordes of very fresh PhDs clamoring for public funds (ahem, TAX dollars) who would do and say ANYthing to keep their grants flowing. Publish or perish? Publish what the STATE wants you to publish, or perish.
Ask Lysenko how it worked out for him.
As to John Lott, he’s honest, came around to a very pro-firearm position when, coming from an ANTI-gun position, he did open-ended research, came to conclusions the Clinton administration refused to accept (they refused to accept their OWN Justice Dept research showing millions of defensive uses of firearms every year and hid the files for a long time), and when he published his book “More Guns, Less Crime,” the credible death threats from the progressives came so regularly he became a gun owner and routine concealed carrier.
Can’t understand for the life of me why he lives/works in effing anti-human rights Maryland, but there you go
Just wait until they adjust for deaths by ethnicity and gender.....they won’t like what they find.
Applying the same reasoning, will they now allocate 50M to research the outcomes of college graduates to determine how much benefit they get from their degrees? The higher-ed industry has stifled research into that for years.
To tackle gun violence you need to tackle behavioral issues, not firearm sales. Someone intent on violence will find a way, legal or not.
But everybody here at FR already knows this..
This website can help slow those losers down: https://gundynamics.com/about
Democrats typical tactics, half truths and lies.
Wow, you’re good!
I’ll save you 50 million.
Black folks kill each other a lot. All over the world. That is America’s gun violence. Study over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.