I noticed a recent article in the Washington Times (which is to print what Fox News is to TV) that had me thinking, “Here we go again.”
The article, headlined “U.S., after long ban, quietly begins to
study gun safety,” reported, with barely-concealed alarm, that the
National Institutes of Health (NIH) is studying the risks to teenagers
from carrying guns. Can you imagine that? A government agency believing
that teens with guns should be considered an issue of public health?
Pro-gun Members of Congress sent NIH an intimidating letter
questioning the gun-related research. A spokesperson for the Gun Owners
of America added ominously, “This kind of research does concern us, and
we’re going to be watching it closely.”
Yes, it’s “déjà vu all over again,” the repetition of a longtime gun
lobby theme. I call it the “fear of facts.” Or, “the less we know about
gun violence, the better off we are.” This principle dictates a
recurring gun lobby tactic: when new information starts to look
threatening to the pro-gun agenda, make sure it never sees the light of
day.
We saw this tactic at work in the 1990s, when the Centers for
Disease Control began to fund firearm surveillance systems at state
health departments to allow the collection of basic data about firearm
deaths and injuries – the same kind of information that has long been
collected about auto deaths and injuries. Gun lobby intimidation led
Congress to cut $2.6 million from CDC’s budget – exactly the amount
that was being spent on gun-related research.
To this day, the CDC is subject to a legislative restriction barring
it from funding research used “in whole or in part to advocate or
promote gun control.” In other words, if there is a chance research
would support the need for stronger gun laws, CDC can’t fund it. There
is no such restriction on research that could be used to oppose
stronger gun laws. Can you imagine if CDC were barred from funding
research that could be used “in whole or in part to advocate or
promote” the regulation of tobacco products?
In recent years, we have seen the “ignorance is bliss” approach of
the gun lobby surface on other issues. It is the basis for the infamous
Tiahrt Amendments
barring public disclosure of the crime gun trace data that for many
years had been routinely disclosed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives. When researchers used the data to show that
state gun laws impede the flow of guns into the illegal market, that
assault weapons are disproportionately traced to crime, and that
certain gun dealers are feeding large numbers of guns into the criminal
market, the gun lobby felt sufficiently threatened to get Congress to
suppress the information.
We see the same effort to hide the truth about state concealed
weapon laws. The National Rifle Association has been shockingly
successful in bullying state legislatures into passing laws that have
exponentially increased the number of people with licenses to carry
concealed weapons, even in the face of strong public opposition. It
turns out that, in state after state with these laws, lots of very
dangerous people have been given licenses to carry hidden handguns in
public, and they have committed lots of very serious crimes.
For example, in 2007, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel
reported that 1,400 individuals who had pled guilty or no-contest to
felony charges had been issued concealed carry licenses and that
license holders had committed crimes ranging from aggravated stalking
to manslaughter. The Sun-Sentinel obtained the names of the license
holders just before the Florida legislature, at the behest of the NRA,
passed legislation to block further public disclosure. The same pattern
has been repeated in other states:
after the press discloses the dangerous individuals granted concealed
carry licenses and their crimes, the NRA immediately seeks legislation
to seal the names.
It’s ironic, isn’t it? The gun lobby insists that “the people should
be trusted to have guns.” But it is unwilling to trust the people with
the truth about guns.
For more information, see Dennis Henigan’s new book, Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy.
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content, so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
OPINION: Gun Lobby Prefers a Policy of Ignorance
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Very funny, Brady. Now where's the punchline?
Can you imagine Brady saying somebody has a "fear of facts"? That is hilarious. Their fear of facts is one of the main reasons that their attempts at disarming law -abiding American citizens is failing the sanity test in more and more state legislatures every year.
If only they had some facts that backed up their doomsday scenarios, maybe they wouldn't be getting trounced on all over the country. However, I am glad they are so ignorant. If they weren't we'd be living in a much more dangerous country than we do.
- LagerHead
October 23, 2009 12:22PM
Reply to this Recommend (2)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'll Argue With That, Good Sir.
If the Brady Campaign were less ignorant we might see them checking their facts and using them to determine that their fight would be better aimed at targeting criminals and not the fine citizens of this nation. Brady has made up my mind for me: they want nothing short of the disarmament of the People, in the name of safety.
Well once we've lost that, what's to stop them from removing free speech or fair trial by jury?
Their ignorance is what continues their anti-gun ways.
- m46607
October 24, 2009 1:34AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
bassakwards
"It’s ironic, isn’t it? The gun lobby insists that “the people should be trusted to have guns .” But it is unwilling to trust the people with the truth about guns".
That quote is typical of one misrepresenting the facts. Analogous to the incorrect conclusion, "The person is a trouble maker and a criminal because he came from a disfunctual family", when the correct conclusion is, " The person is a trouble maker and a criminal, and his family is disfunctional because they have chosen to be".
Again, guns are not the problem no more than automobiles, alcohol , drugs , etc, it is the people that kill by what ever means.
The article would be honest and legitimate if it asked, "Why do some people blame inanimate objects for the actions of people that break the law ?"
" in state after state with these laws, lots of very dangerous people have been given licenses to carry hidden handguns in public, and they have committed lots of very serious crimes."..... So lock up the idiots giving permits to dnagerous people! A criminal gets a drivers license and kills someone with an auto, why isn't the cry to do away with automobiles? Because the anti-guners are simply illogical whiners with nothing better to do!
- CitizenZebra
October 24, 2009 4:08AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Brady Campaign's Predecessor
Brady likes to tell us how well gun control works in other countries.
http://www.xmission.com /~ranthon/hitler-and- guns .htm
They're absolutely right. Gun control, as demonstrated in the above example, works extremely well. I wonder what part of the US population the Brady Campaign has targeted for genocide?
- Don Earl
October 23, 2009 9:08PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Sounds more like the Brady Campaign
The Brady Campaign? Hmmmm?
Isn’t this the group, whose founder and namesake, was shot in a “Gun-Free Zone”? (And they want MORE “Gun-Free Zones”? How’d that work-out for ol’ Jim? Pretty good I guess! Ol’ Jim and his organization makes MILLIONS every year off it.) Didn’t the shooting happened in a city where guns are totally BANNED from LAW-ABIDING hand? The Brady Campaign? Isn’t that the same group that wanted the vice-principal of Pearl High School prosecuted for “Violating the ‘Gun-Free School Zone Law’” when he stopped the slaughter of children at Pearl High School, by retrieving his own gun, and holding the murderer at gun point until the police FINALLY showed up?
Tell us, Brady Campaign to disarm the law -abiding citizens, why are you still saying “a gun is 43 times more likely to shoot a family member” when even the author of that “study” said it was deliberately flawed.
Odd you’d state: “the less we know about gun violence , the better off we are”; that seems to be the Brady Campaign’s operation mantra.
- Wildfire
October 27, 2009 12:05PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.