I would hope that we would have had information about whether an assault weapon ban saves lives or doesn't. Unfortunately, when you don't have those data that really show you, scientifically, whether or not something works, then you end up with people making statements like the following, "Obviously, the assault weapon ban didn't work, because Columbine happened."That's Dr. Mark Rosenberg speaking in an interview with Joaquin Sapien at the investigative website ProPublica. Rosenberg is the fellow who was in charge of research into gun violence in the 1990s as director of the National Center for Injury Prevention Control at the Centers for Disease Control.That's kind of like saying, "Vaccines don't work because someone got the flu."
Until, that is, the National Rifle Association won another of its battles with common sense by getting Congress to end any CDC programs that "may be used to advocate or promote gun control." So, the budget for CDC research into gun violence plunged from $2.5 million in 1996 to $100,000 last year. President Obama is seeking $10 million from Congress for new research in this realm.
Forcing an end to research into the causes and possible prevention of violence that takes tens of thousands of lives each years is the height of arrogance. But then the NRA has reason for that arrogance given how willing the House and Senate and state legislatures around the nation have been to surrender to the gun industry mouthpiece's lobbying and intimidation. It's like having plutocrats ban research into the causes of income inequality.
Please continue reading below the fold as Rosenberg explains what kinds of questions the CDC was looking into when its funding got axed, and presumably what it would do with a restored gun violence budget.
No comments:
Post a Comment