CDC Releases Study on Gun Violence: Defensive gun use common, mass shootings not. I can't wait to see how the anti-gun folks will try to slant this...

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Defensive gun use common, mass shootings not.

I can't wait to see how the anti-gun folks will try to slant this...

http://investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=2234&mn=490049&pt=msg&mid=12912222

RLKurth Loc: I'm from NY, but live in north Florida

WTH does the CDC (Center for Disease Control) have to do with gun violence? People shooting people is just wrong, but it's not a disease is it. Unless it involves bacteria or other biologicals the CDC should keep it's nose out of areas it wasn't designed to do.

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

We are rather fortunate where we live, the only people allowed to carry and use guns/weapons are the police and the military! Seems to work quite well, been like this for the last hundred and fifty years. Cannot understand why more countries don't try it and all the money you save, not having to buy guns and ammunition's, you can spend on photography.
Just a thought!!

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

Leicaflex wrote:

We are rather fortunate where we live, the only people allowed to carry and use guns/weapons are the police and the military! Seems to work quite well, been like this for the last hundred and fifty years. Cannot understand why more countries don't try it and all the money you save, not having to buy guns and ammunition's, you can spend on photography.
Just a thought!!

A good thought, and if the United States had the demographics of your country, did not have a Constitution, and had 3 million people as opposed to nearly 314 million, perhaps we could try it also. :-)

HEART Loc: God's Country - COLORADO

http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-prepares-concealed-carry-gun-law-193704212.html

Chicago concealed permits to rise. Good for Chicago - finally waking up.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

RLKurth wrote:

WTH does the CDC (Center for Disease Control) have to do with gun violence? People shooting people is just wrong, but it's not a disease is it. Unless it involves bacteria or other biologicals the CDC should keep it's nose out of areas it wasn't designed to do.

Did you bother to read the article? If you had your question would have been answered. First, the CDC was instructed to do the study as one of 23 items ordered by Obama.

Second an early paragraph states clearly "Some have posed the logical question as to why the CDC would become involved in such a study which focuses on gun violence when the priority of the agency lies in the preventing and control of diseases. The academic community chose to study gun violence as a public health problem, partly because, according to the study, Violence, including firearm related violence, has been shown to be contagious. Therefore, gun violence is being studied in the same manner of a contagious disease."

Perhaps you should have actually read the article before posting.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Leicaflex wrote:

We are rather fortunate where we live, the only people allowed to carry and use guns/weapons are the police and the military! Seems to work quite well, been like this for the last hundred and fifty years. Cannot understand why more countries don't try it and all the money you save, not having to buy guns and ammunition's, you can spend on photography.
Just a thought!!

Nice that it works for you there, but personally I distrust living in a police state. "Only free men own guns, slaves do not" A government that does not trust its citizens with guns, is a government that should not be trusted.

Bangee5 Loc: Louisiana

First alcohol became a disease and now guns are a disease.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Bangee5 wrote:

First alcohol became a disease and now guns are a disease.

No, they are claiming that gun violence is the disease, and a contagious one at that.

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

heyrob wrote:

Nice that it works for you there, but personally I distrust living in a police state. "Only free men own guns, slaves do not" A government that does not trust its citizens with guns, is a government that should not be trusted.

Well actually, we do not live in a police state as you put it. We do not know what a police state is? The fact is, our police force works for and protects the citizens of the nation. Not all our police officer's carry weapons, there is not need. We are a nation of free men and women and if we start to worry about our government, we simply vote them out.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Leicaflex wrote:

Well actually, we do not live in a police state as you put it. We do not know what a police state is? The fact is, our police force works for and protects the citizens of the nation. Not all our police officer's carry weapons, there is not need. We are a nation of free men and women and if we start to worry about our government, we simply vote them out.

Uwe Reinhardt, a health economist, said it best (talking about a possible national health program for the US). To paraphrase: "What is hard for the rest of the world to understand is that you Americans, with the most democratic government in the world, are more afraid of your government than almost anyone. And yet, if they do something you don't like, you are totally free to vote them out." It is hard to understand. I ran for office once, and supported a national health program. Most of those who were most critical and concerned about this idea were seniors who were on Medicare - or even more amazingly - veterans who received their care through the VA. And while they rated their current care as "excellent and fantastic" and even "the best in the world", they universally parroted the concern that "government healthcare" would somehow be the worst thing that could ever happen to our country. Hard to understand. So we arm ourselves for fear that the government cannot protect us or fear that we will any day have to protect ourselves from the government.

sr71 Loc: In Col. Juan Seguin Land

Leicaflex wrote:

Well actually, we do not live in a police state as you put it. We do not know what a police state is? The fact is, our police force works for and protects the citizens of the nation. Not all our police officer's carry weapons, there is not need. We are a nation of free men and women and if we start to worry about our government, we simply vote them out.

Got some shocking news for you mate. The "Police" can not protect you.

Hoosier in GA Loc: Milledgeville, GA

Having read the CDC article earlier, my guess is the gun-control crowd will pounce on the use of hadguns in suicides.

Underwaterant

Leicaflex wrote:

We are rather fortunate where we live, the only people allowed to carry and use guns/weapons are the police and the military! Seems to work quite well, been like this for the last hundred and fifty years. Cannot understand why more countries don't try it and all the money you save, not having to buy guns and ammunition's, you can spend on photography.
Just a thought!!

SURE !!!
Look at what happened in Britain with the mad, barbaric muslims killing that poor man.
Police don't even have guns and it took around 20-30min. for armed police to arrive.
All because they think it's quaint to have police without firearms to protect the public.
The anti-gun nuts here in Australia have an unpublicised agenda to disarm the police and defence force.
Would that be nice and cosy for you?
Sadly, you think all you need is your camera and no other life, perhaps.
Sadly, too many people like you and your family are brutally murdered regularly and hardly make a headline these days and are only statistics to keep an academic, who has no life, in employment.

ken grant

RLKurth wrote:

WTH does the CDC (Center for Disease Control) have to do with gun violence? People shooting people is just wrong, but it's not a disease is it. Unless it involves bacteria or other biologicals the CDC should keep it's nose out of areas it wasn't designed to do.

Because your President ordered the study!!!!!!!!!!!!!