06-24-2017, 02:29 PM
(06-22-2017, 03:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: tl;dr: The NRA has been stifling gun violence research for 20 years and it is why we don't have a viable solution for curbing gun violence in our country.
First of all, I'm glad this thread was made and I'm glad you made it.
Quote:So, it's no secret that gun control tends to become a hot button issue every time a mass shooting occurs, and sometimes it randomly crops up as well. We know that there are a number of different methods that are discussed to reduce gun deaths in the country.
Enhancing and strengthening NICS
I don't personally know anyone who is against this, right up to the point of universal background checks. I'll get into why later.
Quote:"Assault weapons" bans
Which have shown to have no impact on gun related crime.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html
Quote:Reducing access to the mentally ill
Again, something no one I know would argue against. The way to really address this though is to strengthen the ability to deal with the mentally ill and reverse the disastrous actions of Reagan. This would not only address this issue in relation to firearms but it would make a huge dent in the homeless population as a very large precentage of the homeless are mentally ill.
Quote:And that could go on with the different nuances that are discussed. The problem is, we don't know the effectiveness. There was a study by Lott that said (literally, in its title) More Guns, Less Crime. That study has been called into question with further research. The effectiveness on expanding background checks to private sales, licensing for ownership, all of these things is questionable. There are studies on them, but nothing conclusive as to what would actually cause a benefit. Sure, violent crime, including homicides, have been dropping since the 90s (though they have been steady for a couple years), but we are still at a higher rate than our fellow developed nations. Some do attribute this to a rise in the number of guns available, which that number has risen, but the number of households with firearms has decreased. Then there is the question of the root causes, because let's be honest, firearm availability is only a proximate cause to gun violence. Socioeconomic issues can be the root cause for many, problem is that we don't know.
The problem is that there is no faith in a non-partisan, government funded, study being possible. Even if it was, do you think if the study showed gun control had no discernible affect on crime that the Dems would let it go? Conversely, if it showed that gun control was effective do you think the GOP would allow stricter gun control laws? I have zero faith in either outcome.
Quote:Gun violence in this country should be a major concern, so why is it that we don't know much about it?
In 1996, there was an amendment attached to a bill by a many named Dickey that prevented the CDC funding from being used to promote gun control. Now, Dickey's own words are that what happened after was not the intended effect (and probably why he now regrets he ever drafted this). This has effectively ended gun violence research in this country. There is an average of $5 million spent on gun violence research, almost entirely by private donors (who are also hesitant to spend on it because of the political climate). To give you an idea, one HIV study can cost that much, and we lose many more Americans to gun violence than we do HIV. Even though the amendment does not cut funding for gun violence research, Congress did that the following year, and directors since then have not bucked that trend. This is due to, in large part, lobbying and spending efforts by the NRA.
The issue is that we have an issue in this country that needs to be researched. There needs to be something done, and it may not even be gun control, but we don't know until there is adequate research. Anyone that tells you something will or will not work for certain is full of it, and don't let them convince you otherwise, because they don't have the data to back them up. I know, I'm sitting with a stack of the data that is out there. Maybe it doesn't need to be the CDC, maybe it is some other research avenue, but we need to be doing research on this so we can find out the appropriate policy solutions.
Sorry, I took a break from my research to go on a bit of a rant. I just figured I would throw this out there for anyone interested in it. Now back to your regularly scheduled bickering.
I'd be cool with the RAND corporation doing a study, but I don't think a study is actually important to anyone. The gun issue is an easy wedge issue to exploit. It energizes the bases of both parties and gets them to the ballot box and opens their wallets. If it was actually important it could be privately funded in a second. You think mega-donors like the Kochs or Soros couldn't pay for an in depth exhaustive study and not even notice the money they spent was gone?
