Yeah, tell that to anyone who works at the CDC. As with all legislation whose goal is to curtail discourse, the actual effect is to make CDC employees feel even broaching the subject can lead them to be disciplined, including termination. The gun lobby got exactly what they wanted - a complete shut-down of rational, scientific discourse of the impacts of their propaganda machine. “Pushing” an “agenda”. Right.
19 Likes
In practice, they’re prohibited from gathering the stats since there’s no way to keep the truth from “push[ing] an agenda.” Facts, well-known bias, all that.
16 Likes
One man’s discourse is another man’s propaganda. It was passed for a specific reason with a specific limitation. The CDC still tracks gun deaths. So doe the FBI and other agencies. Nothing is preventing the FBI or the Justice Dept from doing more in depth data gathering. Nothing is stopping 3rd party groups from doing the same thing. Many cities put out annual reports which have much, much more detailed crime stats.
The data is there. Bemoaning the CDC has one limitation ignores the fact there are dozens of orgs gathering said data. What, specifically, is one looking for in data that isn’t being gathered? It doesn’t matter. You put out how statistically rare things are and it just changes to an appeal to emotion.
4 Likes
Apparently there have been 18 school shootings in the US since the start of 2018.
Canada has had 19.
Since 1884.
14 Likes
At this point, there’s enough publicly available data to where I feel like a wizardly statistician could give us a probability estimator for where the next mass shooting will occur.
Anyone here a wizard?
3 Likes
Danged 1%-ers!
1 Like
Maryland seems an interesting outlier. All gone wrong since Munch moved to new York.
1 Like
Imagine if the fast food industry successfully lobbied congress to pass a law preventing the CDC from using stats on heart disease to “push an agenda.” Or if the pool industry passed a law preventing the CDC from making conclusions or recommendations regarding children who die in drownings. Or if the automotive industry lobbied to keep government money from being used to find ways to reduce traffic deaths.
19 Likes
This is a really poor way of presenting the data. The colors are too close to readily distinguish one from another, and it’s difficult to match the colors of the small squares in the key with the large swaths of color on the map.
3 Likes
The problem is that even AR-15 or an AK-47 are considered as “hunting” or “sports” rifles by many. So while probably not many homicides are committed by a bolt-action rifle, AR-15 seems to be a regular in these incidents. So this will muddy any such statistics.
It is an uniquely US problem that what is essentially a modified assault rifle can be considered as a sports or hunting weapon.
2 Likes
Again, the CDC still does stat tracking. The other agencies do stat tracking. What, specifically, does one want tracked that isn’t being tracked? I suppose I would see your point if all data gathering had been shut down, but that is far from what happened. I am also a bit confused with it comes to crime stats that we are looking to the CDC when the Justice Department and the FBI are the ones who are directly involved with those stats. Though I suppose suicide and accidents are more to the CDCs mission statement.
At any rate, if one disagrees with that law, fair enough. Get it changed. But I am going to correct any statements saying something like “CDC banned from assembling those stats”. That isn’t true.
2 Likes
Imagine if the CDC was allowed to track statistics for communicable diseases or other preventable deaths but was prevented by law from actually using that data to suggest policies to reduce the number of said deaths.
We’d have to change the name of the agency from “The Center for Disease Control and Prevention” to “The Center for Impassive Disease Observation.”
12 Likes
It’s all just labels. One of the earliest and worst school shootings was Charles Whitman and he was primarily armed with a 6mm Remington 700, which is as hunting rifle as one can get. The reality is, the difference between a standard deer rifle and a sniper rifle is usually the stock, a little nice scope, and a thicker barrel. That’s it. Their performance is about the same. I see comments above about how, “Oh, well, most of them are armed with hunting rifles and such, not assault rifles.” is a moot point. The point is they don’t have a ton of people wanting to kill other people. Part of it is probably a numbers game, less people means you have less of a change for that one out of 10s of millions of people who would want to commit a heinous act.
1 Like
Yes, the “specific reason” was to not have information from a neutral, scientific, public organization which was in opposition to the gun manufacturing industries’ propaganda that “guns kill criminals”. Discourse isn’t opinion - it’s discussion. The goal of the Dickey Amendment was to curtail discussion and it has been an excellent investment for the gun manufacturers.
But don’t worry, “Dickey’s” on “the list”.
8 Likes
Hmm maybe we should make it so that it’s more difficult to get these weapons and less people have them, then.
11 Likes
Baltimore …
5 Likes
More good guys with guns bravely defending people I see.
1 Like
What we lack in quantity, we make up in “quality”.
4 Likes
Just a thought. Is there any analysis of domestic violence and gun violence (non-suicide) in relation to each other? I ask only because it seems about half of mass shooters have a DV charge or equivalent in their pasts.
5 Likes
