Skip to main content

View Diary: Defensive Gun Use (Part I) - The CDC Report on Gun Violence (57 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I wonder why (5+ / 0-)

    What an oversight on their part not to have any really thorough scientific reviews on the subject /snark

    In the 1990s, politicians backed by the NRA attacked researchers for publishing data on firearm research. For good measure, they also went after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for funding the research. According to the NRA, such science is not “legitimate.” To make sure federal agencies got the message, Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) sponsored an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget, the exact amount it had spent on firearms research the previous year.
    vhttp://www.slate.com/...

    What a disingenuous complaint to make about the lack of data on any aspect of gun ownership or use.

    “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

    by Catte Nappe on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:39:22 PM PDT

    •  I agree: research has been hampered (6+ / 0-)

      I agree entirely that important research on gun violence in America was almost stopped overnight by removing funding to the CDC.

      Sadly, the June 2013 report by the CDC did a very poor job of reviewing the existing research on DGU.  There is indeed a body of literature on DGU to be reviewed, but the CDC report mostly ignored the topic.  Perhaps sadder still, the CDC report did NOT make any recommendations to conduct more or better studies of DGU in the future.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:58:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Fewer than 5 orgs fund gun violence research (5+ / 0-)

      From your link:

      Paul Thacker: Since the ban on CDC funding for firearm violence research, how do scientists such as yourself find money for this type of science?

      Garen Wintemute: The National Institute of Justice had a highly respected program of research in the field, smaller than CDC’s. That program ended several years ago when its program officer, a strong advocate for research on violence, retired. A number of private foundations also provided funding for this research, particularly in the 1990s, but many of them have left the field as well. Today, to my knowledge, there are fewer than five.

      So stripping the CDC money had a real chilling effect. Might that be that the CDC compiled the basic national data set from which other organizations could draw to plan their own targeted studies.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:01:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Regarding funding for research and dissemination: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LilithGardener, Joy of Fishes
        SafetyLit began in 1995 as an update service for literature about the prevention of brain and spinal cord injuries. Over the years, its scope expanded to include all unintentional injuries, interpersonal violence and self-harm. Many distinct professional disciplines publish material relevant to preventing injuries or promoting safety....

        Until the summer of 2013, SafetyLit was funded primarily through government grants and contacts. With the "sequester" most government funding sources have ended.

        Thus, the SafetyLit Foundation, Inc. a California not for profit company was formed to allow support from other sources. The application process has started to achieve US federal 501(c)(3) status. When this is obtained, the SafetyLit Foundation may receive tax-deductible donations.

        SafetyLit® Foundation, Inc.
        Injuries have causes --
        they don't simply befall us from fate or bad luck.

        To prevent injuries it is necessary to have information about the factors that contribute to their occurrence. With this information we may understand the options for prevention. Effective injury prevention requires a multifaceted, multidisciplinary approach.

        SafetyLit®
    •  Reducing traffic fatalities is one of our big (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Glen The Plumber, Joy of Fishes

      public health successes in the 20th century. Wonder what could be achieved if we had $50-60 million invested annually in a Firearm Safety Administration.

      Another interesting clip from the link in Catte Nappe's comment.

      PT: About as many people in the United States are killed in auto accidents as by firearms. How does the amount of research and number of scientists in auto safety compare to firearm safety?

      GW: I believe that 2012 will turn out to be the first year in which the United States has more deaths from firearm violence than motor vehicles.

      An entire federal agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, has as its mission the understanding and prevention of death and injury on our roads and highways. It reports fiscal year 2012 funding of $62.4 million overall for research and analysis: $35.5 million for vehicle safety and $26.9 million for highway safety.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:05:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The auto industry did not like that research (3+ / 0-)

        Relevant to the topic of guns.

        The auto industry did not like research into automobile injuries and deaths.  I'm guessing they never thought to use their clout in Washington to stop such research.

        One of the important findings to come out of studies of automobile injuries and deaths is the understanding that it is easier to design a safer product than it is to change the behavior of the product users.

        We knew that seat belts saved lives, but the public couldn't be convinced to use them regularly.  So first there were automatic belts that wrapped around the driver when the car door was closed, and then came air-bags.

        That same kind of thinking is now being put towards better gun design and gun safety features.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:18:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Preventing accidents is good (4+ / 0-)

          and keeping guns away from kids with locks and so forth. But accidents are a relatively tiny percentage of the injuries and deaths. Reducing the prevalence of gun ownership is the main way to get the numbers to go down. How to do that is the big question but I would be for a combination approach that could include increased legal restrictions, legal moves against gun or ammunition manufacturers, and social marketing messages, similar to the approach taken with tobacco where all three have been used to get the smoking rate to go down.

          •  I'm not sure about this (3+ / 0-)
            Reducing the prevalence of gun ownership is the main way to get the numbers to go down.
            But I'm open to this:
            Reducing the prevalence of [private and public carry of guns by untrained, careless, and angry persons] is the main way to get the numbers to go down.

            One of the reasons I like the idea of licensing is that it minor infractions could incur points just like we have for driving. And there could be intervention long before someone gets shot. Intervention doesn't necessarily mean someone has to go to jail.

            E.g.
            Forget your gun is in your bag when you board an airplane? You get points for that.

            Your kid is playing with your gun and shoots through the wall. No injuries. You get points and 1 year loss of RKBA for that + you have to pass a remedial training program.

            You are doing something with your gun and you shoot yourself. Minor injuries. You get points and 3 year loss of RKBA for that + you have to pass a remedial training program.

            etc.

            I don't know  exactly what length of time would make sense for temporary loss of RBKA.

            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

            by LilithGardener on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 02:10:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LilithGardener, Joy of Fishes

              I say that based on several studies which have demonstrated that having a gun in the home makes you many times more likely to be the victim of homicide or suicide in the home. Having it around is, not surprisingly, a risk factor for being shot with it. If you don't have one in the house you are unlikely to get shot with it. (I thought of this again with the pellet gun shooting through a neighbor's window by a teenage boy near me last week. We don't have any guns, therefore my kids do not have the opportunity to accidentally or intentionally shoot anybody.)

              But, I agree with a stepped restrictions / licensing type system as part of the overall plan.

              •  Yes, your point is where a stepped intervention (3+ / 0-)

                system would lead.

                IMO, some careless people are too disorganized to own a gun. They create a menace with it everywhere they go. Some of them would not be sufficiently organized to do remedial training, etc.

                Temporary removal of RKBA such as I describe above, would (over time) get guns out of the homes and out of the hands of careless and negligent gun owners.

                I suspect alcohol is a big factor. We already know it's a big factor in violent crime of all kinds, and I'll be it's a big factor in what you cite above. People arguing, etc. alcohol erodes inhibitions and makes acting on impulse more deadly when there is a gun handy.

                "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                by LilithGardener on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 02:32:27 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site