Quote:
Originally Posted by mav1178
part of the problem was that for years, Republicans threatened to stop funding the CDC unless it stopped funding research into firearm injuries and death. this started in 1996 and only restarted after 2019.
so for years, politicians talked past each other with NO ACTUAL DATA on what gun violence looks like in the context of public health, and so everyone was talking out of their asses and data was only as good as the sources providing it.
"follow the science" is what people like to say. I guess if you don't fund the science and blame non-government research as biased, then everyone can twist the data to their own benefit.
can't have an honest debate about preventing gun violence when you can't even study the issue via the federal government...
|
mav, looks like you left out the fact that the "CDC" and it's parent agency the "U.S. Public Health Service" was known for having an "anti-gun political bias". It's not even that difficult to look up.
The NRA, Republicans, or pro-gun community couldn't give two shits about actual non-bias scientific firearm research. The problem is making sure there's absolutely no bias either way to being pro, or anti gun.