Dems press ATF to update decades-old gun violence data | TheHill:
House Democrats are calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to update a report it last published nearly two decades ago about gun violence to help inform public policy on the issue.Yes, that 'old' report was biased and misleading, which is why that toy was taken away until Dems grew up. They haven't grown up yet, so they can't have their dangerous toy ... CDC.
The ATF last published a report titled “Following the Gun,” which reviewed how criminals obtain firearms, in 2000.If the Donkeys really want to know how criminals obtain firearms, here's how:
THEY BREAK THE LAW!
The lawmakers said that a new report with more recent statistics would provide the public with more understanding of how gun violence occurs in America. The lawmakers noted to Brandon that congressional offices and research organizations “continue to regularly cite possibly outdated statistics from the report.” “Updated research and reports will aid policymakers as we continue to confront this crisis we are facing as a nation,” Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), who spearheaded the letter, said in a statement on Tuesday.The Honorable Jackass from Illinois could, if he was really interested in stopping crime in his crime-ridden state (you know, one of those with the toughest gun control laws in the nation), could cut down on crime in a single year if he focused more on GUNS and less on CONTROL.
The way to cut down on gun crime is to make it illegal to use a gun in the commission of a crime.
I know, that sounds obvious ... except to the oblivious. But here's the kicker:
If Illinois would seriously penalize use of a firearm in commission of a crime ... any crime on the books ... and make it stick, then criminals will eventually figure out that that they're better off with the traditional knife, brass knuckles and baseball bats. You know ... the same tools they use at home to slaughter their wives.
Quigley's district represents parts of Chicago, which has seen hundreds of gun deaths so far this year. Democrats have pushed to eliminate a budget provision that has effectively frozen most government research into gun violence for nearly two decades. The provision, first enacted in 1996 under pressure from gun rights groups, prohibits the use of federal funds “to advocate or promote gun control.” The statute has resulted in a chilling effect on government research into gun violence, even though it is not an outright ban on producing data related to the effects of firearms. Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee blocked a Democratic effort in July to allow the Centers for Disease Control to study gun-related deaths.Someone sneakily commented that it is a BUDGET PROVISION that they want to reverse, not a POLICY DECISION; The Feds won't pay CDC to follow the party line vis-a-vis gun CONTROL, not gun INCIDENTS. We know how many people get killed by guns.
And here's how we know: "WISQARS" Guess what? The information comes from CDC.
Here is the CDC's report on Leading Causes of Death, by age group.
You know what's not in the top ten causes? Homicide. You're more likely to be killed by your stepladder than by your gun. (I made that up but you'll see it again in a moment.)
What are the other possible causes of death when the instrument is a gun?
How about unintentional injury? That's number 4 over all age groups.
(That includes "accidental shootings" and "car wrecks", as well as drowning, fire, falling from ladders, etc.)
Homicide isn't on the final top-ten list; and Suicide is barely on the scale at number ten. So much for guns being so awful.
Just for comparison, I've chosen 'accidental deaths' by 'falling off stepladders' to compare the impact of firearms ownership.
In the first place, stepladders are not deliberately designed to kill people.
Guns are deliberately designed to kill ... not just people, but also animals and (in MY "Wally World" guns are designed to also "kill" nefarious sheets of cardboard and steel plates, which I shoot at in IPSC competitions and miss all too regularly.
(But that's too personal, and grist for a different article.)
Nobody practices Stepladder Control, because that's just silly. But I have a smoke alarm upstairs that's too high for me to reach without a stepladder, and the battery is dead; still, I haven't replaced it because a moment of vertigo while I'm replacing the battery will tumble me down the stairs at grave risk to life and limb. I'm afraid of fire, I'm more afraid of falls, and I'm a LOT less afraid of guns.
Why am I afraid of stepladders, and not afraid of guns?
Because I can control guns but not vertigo or falls. Accidental death/injury, in the top 10!
Frankly, I wish someone would design a stepladder which would not cause me to topple down the stairs, but they don't. However, there are laws regulating guns ... which offer me no threat at all unless someone points one at me, and those guns are a less threatening danger because I carry a gun for personal defense.
I don't see CDC receiving federal funding to warn you that "GUNS ARE DANGEROUS!" without balancing their reports that people often use guns to defend themselves against predation by criminals; which is why CDC funding was crippled in the first place.
And that's the reason why the Donkey Party wants CDC funding for "gun control research" to resume, because those people don't care about injuries. Or death. They just want a complaisant public which has no Final Solution to an autocratic government.
And that's what the Asses want, in the final analysis:
Rule by Fiat (which doesn't work when imposed on an armed America)