CDC and Reporting of Firearm Deaths

The Center for Disease Control ("CDC"), despite having been penalized in the past by losing millions of dollars in federal funding because of their biased reporting of "firearm violence", continues to poison the well of Second Amendment Rights.

This time, it was "an accident".   It was 'a coding error'.

Right.

Fatal Injury Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC:

 Note Regarding Unintentional Firearm Deaths in 2014 There was a coding error in the 2014 file that increases the number of unintentional firearm deaths (W32-W34: Accidental discharge of firearms) substantially in some states. The error was not technically isolated to any particular state, but because of the nature of the error, data from some states (TN, NC) were affected more than others in 2014. Results for 2014 unintentional firearm deaths should be interpreted with caution.

As Breitbart reported on October 29:

According to Fox News, the CDC reported “586” accidental gun deaths in 2014. Lott studied the numbers and realized they were inflated by 100; the reported number should have been “486.” ( John) Lott described the CDC’s error as “a big mistake” and said it had the effect of suppressing news that the U.S. had “the lowest number [of accidental gun deaths] on record despite the explosion in gun sales and concealed carry permits.” (emphasis added)
Lott explained that the CDC’s mistake “was not technically isolated to any particular state, but because of the nature of the error, data from some states (TN, NC) were affected more than others in 2014.” This meant TN accidental gun deaths were reported as having jumped from 19 to 105. In reality, Lott said TN’s accidental gun deaths should have been reported as “5.”

This is the kind of biased reporting that CDC has carried out in the past.  This is the reason why Congress defunded their "gun control reporting" decades ago.  And this is the reason why CDC's decision to treat "Gun Violence" as an "epidemic" has led to increasing public lack of confidence in what should have been a valuable public service.

All because the CDC has a staff of politically motivated researchers who cannot divorce their private opinion from their pubic duty to report the truth.

They're suppose to be the best and the brightest, but in the final analysis we can only say;