There is absolutely no reason why the CDC shouldn't be doing research on firearm deaths and injuries.
Can ANY of you actually justify blocking the CDC from researching gun violence?
>Hard Mode: No 'Hurr Durr it's not a disease'
Neither are fucking hurricanes and chemicals but they still study that shit.
They are biased as fuck.
>>29977045
Yes, they were caught conducting research to support the conclusion that guns should be banned. That's not how science works, nigger. Besides, what percentage of medical research originates from the cdc? Calm your tits. They should focus on zika and childhood obesity.
Probably a bait thread, so I'll sage you.
>>29977075
Do you have a source on the CDC conducting bias research?
What if we didn't ban guns....
We banned crime?
>>29977045
Spending money on a study is pointless, if the person funding it decides the conclusion.
>>29977045
Because time and time again they've gotten the same results and it became a waste of money.
Because all crime should be considered a disease, the weapon used is irrelevant. By focusing on only one group, you've already created a bias. Crime is just the visible symptom of a bigger issue, and firearms are a easy scapegoat for politicians too lazy to try and fix it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/12/why-the-centers-for-disease-control-should-not-receive-gun-research-funding/#6733dbc62eb5
Yes it is an opinon piece but it has what your asking for.
Basicly the stated stance of the PHS which controls the CDC is to reducr the number of guns in public circulation
>>29977045
GRC please go
The CDC did studies and despite the fact that they're obongo lackeys it proved that the facts were on our side
CDC study from 2003:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
Best part:
>"insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed for preventing violence.”
>>29977270
>the CDC cucked itself trying to prove their opinion right
>>29977045
I'm looking for work. But nothing qualifies me for statistical studies, and social behaviorism. But you'd make a bunch gang units real proud with this glorious thred. God bless this thread, God bless America
>>29977045
I hate to point this out, but hurricanes belong to the National Weather Service. They'd be pissed if the CDC started studying them too.
>>29977523
>natural disasters belong to a group of humans
Could you tell them to be more responsible with them then?
t. coastal Texan
>>29977045
There is no such meaningful category as "gun violence." This is an aggregate statistic that includes gun use among gangs and other criminals (but doesn't include use of other weapons, like knives), as well as suicides with guns (but doesn't include suicides from other methods, like jumping off buildings and so forth). Taking parts of the two meaningful categories (crime and suicide) with no empirical reason to do so is flawed science. The only possible motivation to move forward with flawed science is a political agenda.
If the CDC wanted to study suicides, that might be slightly related to their aims, although mental illnesses are really better studied by specialists in psychology. I have been through graduate school and spent a lot of time in academia. Even the most accomplished professors who you'd think would know about every subject are actually only really knowledgeable about their field of specialization. If a public health organization wants to study CRIME, then they'd need to hire huge numbers of specialists in crime research before even beginning to think they know what they're doing. The CDC has no place wasting their resources studying crime, though, since there ALREADY ARE organizations that specialize in studying this.
Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that the CDC is a taxpayer-funded organization, and has stated goals of benefiting the public good. Obama wants to use it for his megalomaniacal political ends, and that is immoral.
>>29977082
>bias research
Can you semi-literate people finally figure this one out? It's not "bias research." It's "biased research." "Bias" is a noun or verb. "Biased" is the adjective.
>>29977082
Did you read their own studies, you dumb fucking nigger?
>>29977961
This. Someone with a degree in public health or a virologist when asked to study crime is going to go to the library and look under "C".
When you realize this you also realize they were just using the credibility and weight of the CDC as an organization to accomplish political agendas.
It was shameful and dangerous in that it would undermine the credibility of the CDC and that could in fact cost lives.
>>29977559
LOL! I would if I could; I live in Houston.
>>29977045
>Can ANY of you actually justify blocking the CDC from researching gun violence?
Because any use of taxpayer money by known, appointed (not elected) subversives to undermine the constitution, the supreme law of the land, is at best a boondoggle and at worst outright treason.
>>29977045
Fuck off OP, you bootlicking hoplophobe.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/15/why-congress-cut-the-cdcs-gun-research-budget/
>>29977045
Yeah, how about they spend their finite budget on shit that has a significant statistical chance of killing me?
>>29977045
I approve of research into violence involving firearms, just so long as it's unbiased and provides descriptive contexts for statistics, avoiding lumping things in with eachother such as homicide and self defense
>>29980030
>hoplophobe.
What is that?
>>29977045
>gun =/= disease
but the mental illness that drives irrational fear of them should be
>>29980148
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia
Welcome to /k/, now git out.
