The editors of Michaels Bloomberg’s News despair at rural rednecks’ recall of “sensible” Coloradoan politicians over gun confiscation laws they pushed through, and blames to result on the lack of data detailing the ill effects of guns.
Gun reform advocates … lack a sufficient body of research on the relationship between guns and public safety. This makes it more difficult to articulate a compelling case.
The paucity of research is no accident. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other government researchers have been thwarted by a heavy-handed legislative directive that prohibits funding to “advocate or promote gun control.” President Barack Obama has sought to mitigate the damage through executive action, but it’s Congress that controls the nation’s purse.
Research won’t resolve the rural versus urban or individualism versus communitarian conflicts that predate the republic. But it will put the old debates on newer, more solid ground. Given the deep animosity of the National Rifle Association to credible research, proponents of sensible gun regulation can distinguish themselves by pushing for more and better research on the health and safety effects of guns.
Let the research show what it will. And then fashion the arguments accordingly.
These genius “journalists” fashioned their argument against guns long ago; now they admit they don’t have the data to support their argument? Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s made up.
Put another way, wise eastern liberals already “know” that guns in the hands of civilians are too dangerous to be tolerated, they just some need some data to support what they have already intuited. Because, you know, liberals are sensible and nuanced.