Has anyone actually read the CDC's gun law study?

[Bobarino]

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

i don't want to take up bandwidth by placing the text here, please click the link.

the more i read, the more disgusted i got. the whole "study" is nothing but a cop-out. its full of "insufficient evidence" based on a million different factors that seem mostly bogus to me. although its a step in the right direction when the CDC states that "evidence is insufficient" to determine the effectiveness of "gun control" laws, i wish they would have stepped up to plate and published the truth, and boldy stated that gun control laws are INEFFECTIVE. just as has been found time and time again, and just as John Lott stated, More Guns=Less Crime. why do they think that more and more states are passing CCW legislation? because they KNOW its effective at reducing violent crime rates! its blatantly obvious that the CDC didn't find the results they were hoping for, so they published that everything is "insufficient" to determine whether or not gun control laws are effective or ineffective. what a cop-out.

Bobby

 

[geekWithA.45]

A cop out is fine with me, in this case.

IMO, CDC is saying they can't say anything, and are therefore bailing the heck out of the debate, which they had no business being in to begin with.

As for them stepping up to the plate....tain't gonna happen, too much of a political hot potatoe.

 

[Graystar]

The problem is that the CDC's belief that guns laws reduce crime has not been diminished one bit. They are blaming the methodology for not finding the evidence, and not the fact that guns laws don’t work. They will rework their methodology until it gives the results they want and to hell with the truth.

 

[Standing Wolf]

what a cop-out.

Actually, that's further evidence of your hard-earned tax dollars and mine in pursuit of leftist extremism.

 

[Obiwan]

A lot more people die from medical malpractice than guns every year.

But they (CDC) spend our tax dollars on this drivel instead???

MAybe we could save some money...and cut their staff/resources...hmmmm

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Since when did guns become a disease? Or is it lead poisoning?

But all is not lost. The findings of the CDC study tells all. They can not find sufficient evidence to show that gun control laws reduce crime/injury. This is comparable to the Brady Bunch stating that gun control does not work. Remember, the CDC has been trying to "prove" that guns are evil. To state inconclusivity is an admission that they are WRONG. It is HUGE. But, have you heard anything from NBCABCCBSCNNMSNBC?

 

[dischord]

They can not find sufficient evidence to show that gun control laws reduce crime/injury. This is comparable to the Brady Bunch stating that gun control does not work.

Don't assume too much victory out of this "study." The CDC didn't say the evidence is lacking. It didn't even look for the evidence. It merely did a literature review of existing studies and said they fail to show the evidence -- but then it called for further studies to try to establish the evidence. Its goal is to establish a link, and this literature review -- rather than being a CDC capitulation -- is a subtle call for more funds/permission to advance its anti-gun agenda. Or, at least, it's a plea to CDC's private-sector and academic allies to come up with some better propaganda.

Remember, lack of proof is not proof of the lack of proof -- that's CDC's position in a nutshell.

Since when did guns become a disease?

Don't get so caught up on the name of the agency. The fact is -- right or wrong -- that Congress granted CDC the power to study gun injuries when it created the National Center for Injury Control and Prevention.