How the NRA Enables Massacres

[RandySF]

After attending the NRA's Convention in Indianapolis, I wrote recently in these pages about all the NRA does to encourage paranoia and hatred while selling the weaponry not of self protection or hunting, but war, to anyone with a stack of bills and a glint in their eye.

But this past week we've seen the other side of the coin. How the NRA works to suppress information that would lead to treating a public health catastrophe that claims over 30,000 lives per year and injures over 100,000 as that very thing, while fighting to ensure we have as little access to information as possible that might help save lives.

The simple fact is, much like with their friends on the right from the tobacco industry to the oil industry to the megachurch, science and information are the enemies of the NRA. They have proven they will do whatever it takes to make sure we have less of it, and more Santa Barbaras.

The clearest example, of course, is the NRA's labeling a bill sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) to allow the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to once again use its considerable expertise to research gun violence prevention, “unethical.” Yes, they actually said that.

Because anyone who does statistically significant research on a public health problem from the angle of helping people and not profiting from misery, and again and again finds obvious truths such as owning guns makes you more likely to get shot, is not someone the NRA and its allies will countenance without smearing. I debated one of these types from the Second Amendment Foundation on NPR recently regarding the CDC. It is amazing how tongue-tied they get when you present them with irrefutable information.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/24/the-nra-s-all-out-assault-on-accurate-information-about-gun-deaths.html

[hlthe2b]

1. ^^This^^

[gejohnston]

2. because of the quality of research they paid for was very poor.

The fact that it wasn't objective research (unlike the research done by the DoJ and the Library of Congress during the so called "research ban" which only bans lobbying and advocacy.)
Since they gave a couple of million to an ER doctor to do "research" that was not published in a criminology journal, told criminologists who asked for the data to replicate the study, he told them to pound sand. When he finally did, the study was destroyed.
My questions are:
Why the CDC when the NIJ and LoC have been doing research, the former is done by sociologists and submitted peer reviewed criminology journals? Granted, they come up with conclusions that gun control groups don't like. But, so what?
For the CDC to give money away for gun violence research, there should be conditions, just like there are conditions for any tax money being handed out. They should be:
The study should be submitted for peer review in a recognized criminology journal
Any researcher who wants the data, it must be provided
The entire study and the raw data must be a free download on CDC website, along with critiques and counter studies.

Do I think the gun control activists would support those conditions? I doubt it.
One last thing:

But this past week we've seen the other side of the coin. How the NRA works to suppress information that would lead to treating a public health catastrophe that claims over 30,000 lives per year and injures over 100,000 as that very thing, while fighting to ensure we have as little access to information as possible that might help save lives.

20K are suicides. We already have the information, just that gun control activists ignore them. The DoJ study (Wright/Rossi) show that criminals don't go to gun shows to buy guns. Yet they ignore it because they don't like it. The LoC study that showed that there is no correlation between gun laws and crimes, looking at 27 countries, and their crime rates. We know that, yet GCAs don't like the answer.

[ileus]

3. You'd think they'd know by now guns kill people.

[Jenoch]

4. I find it troubling when

an organization has a conclusion they have and then they look for information (research) to support their message.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

8. I've said before...

...fact finders find facts to form opinions; fault finders find faults to further fear, prejudice and stereotypes.

[Eleanors38]

5. You should see "Than you for Smoking."

[ManiacJoe]

6. The CDC should stick to medical discussions

if their previous "research" on guns is any indication of what more gun "research" they want to do.

[krispos42]

7. "treating a public health catastrophe", huh?

So... what's the cure?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

9. "How the NRA Enables Massacres"

enable -
1> a : to provide with the means or opportunity
b : to make possible, practical, or easy
c : to cause to operate
2> to give legal power, capacity, or sanction to

[jimmy the one]

10. irrational rifle association

Randy: How the NRA works to suppress information that would lead to treating a public health catastrophe {gun death & injury} while fighting to ensure we have as little access to information as possible that might help save lives.

Tack on promoting a rightwing gun culture as if it were the cure not the disease;

randy: .. the NRA's labeling a bill sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) to allow the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to once again use its considerable expertise to research gun violence prevention, “unethical.”

Fractured casuistic specious reasoning from the masters of it.

randy: After attending the NRA's Convention in Indianapolis, I wrote recently in these pages about all the NRA does to encourage paranoia and hatred while selling the weaponry not of self protection or hunting, but war, to anyone with a stack of bills and a glint in their eye.

You should visit this board (& gun control reform activism where gunnuts are disallowed: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1262 ) more often.
I do wonder how you managed thru the nra convention, as a gc advocate; - I came across one similar who actually joined the nra in order to receive & read nra propagunda. Was it a pain in the neck? Were you suspect as an intruder? or did you get high fives & people smile & point finger guns when the word 'criminal' was mentioned? Long time back one attendee said nra conventions & get togethers were like a grade school class bickering & snickering.
Glad you made it out alive. What kind of bullet vest did you wear?

[blueridge3210]

11. Reading comprehension fail.

Did you notice that the OP was quoting a new article written by the person who actually attended the event? Or, in you rush to apply broad-brush smear attacks, did you miss this little factoid?