Posted on 01/07/2017 6:36:41 AM PST by rellimpank
(CNSNews.com) – “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January.
“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.
The report, which notes that “ violent crimes, including homicides specifically, have declined in the past five years,” also pointed out that “some firearm violence results in death, but most does not.” In fact, the CDC report said, most incidents involving the discharge of firearms do not result in a fatality
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
It doesn’t take a genius to know that if you get into a hatchet fight, you’d better have a hatchet.
Gun Free Zones KILL!
It is amazing at what the efforts POLITICAL government agencies like CDC start to change their tune. It bespeaks of their addition to money and largess from government.
Perhaps the threat of their continuance might push them in a direction away from guns, spousal abuse and other socio-political arenas they study and characterize as ‘diseases’ they need more funding to combat back into the real areas for which the CDC was created.
Is it me or is the federal government seemingly putting a bunch of info out there directly opposed to the Obama administration SJW BS...?
Federal workers are now trying to protect their jobs.
This is why I love those guys.
To attain such an astounding grasp of the obvious surely requires a PhD, ehh ?
Nah dude. They came out with this study in the height of the Obama gun ban push. Like, 2013 or so. I still worked there then.
Are they counting a victim’s gun being displayed but not fired as a gun ‘use’? If firing the gun is required to count, they’re ignoring a very large number of crimes that were deterred by the intended victim having a gun.
No, but it helps credibility. Remember John Lott, he's a doctoral scholar. :)
In this instance, PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper.
True but I don't know how you track those.
Never mind - I missed the ‘threatening’ qualifier.
Another example of a useless and redundant bureaucracy wasting our money, telling us what we already know.
Aren’t there dozens of privately funded foundations which conduct studies of this kind in the public interest?
This waste needs to be stopped.
Nobody said there weren’t prescient employees there then. Even the most politically motivated has to let the truth slip out sometimes when faced with insurmountable verified evidence. The very fact this study was commissioned for the CDC to accomplish is patently absurd.
Overall, in the last 20 years, CDC did study, and address areas in which it had no business in doing so. It was the equivalent of NASA’s aegis of the Muslims’ contributions to space science. The expertise and experience of both organizations was bastardized and mutated beyond all recognition by political expedience giving fealty to Democrats. In the process, the core areas they were to address suffered.
What happened to CDC saying guns are a “public health issue?”
I understand your point, but frankly in a hatchet fight I’d rather have a gun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.