Other than health and safety of the subjects?
One of da most fascinating issues to me is that da lobbyists have succeeded in getting Congress to outlaw both data collection and research on gun safety. As a result, there's no real way to tell if more guns make for less crime, if CCW carriers are safe and help save lives, if "assault weapons" are really a problem. We are left relying on news reports from what many consider a liberally-biased media.
JMHawkins in da previous thread complains that it's just because the funding would run through the Center for Disease Control or the NIH. I expect that's because he doesn't really understand how federal grant funding works, where da department just acts as a clearinghouse for distributing grants to non-governmental (private, free market) groups to do the research. The CDC happens to be da agency that maintains the data center for the Consumer Product Safety Commission, but da CPSC is a regulatory agency not a research agency, and doesn't have da expertise to fund research. So all of da funding for consumer products research is funneled through the CDC. That avoids da inefficiency of creating ANOTHER government agency. In da same way, the National Science Foundation is da clearinghouse for stuff like science and math education research, because they have more expertise dealin' with science than da folks in the Department of Education.
What JMHawkins is missing is that Congress under lobbyist pressure has systematically prevented all agencies from funding research or gathering data on guns or gun safety. Not just the CDC.
That means that nobody is gathering systematic, nationwide data. Researchers are left with state-by-state data, if da state collected any, and usually all of it incompatible with other states.
That means that da only people doin' "research" are funded by private, special-interest lobbies or news media outlets doin' expose pieces.
Most of da issues surrounding firearms I think there are legitimate arguments or at least things to consider carefully on both sides. I have to admit, that on this particular issue I think this is just stupid and irresponsible. No other important public policy area is devoid of data and research. We want research to guide and inform our public policy choices.
What's more, it's a horrifying precedent to allow any special interest group to do that. Imagine the auto makers blocking research on transportation safety, drug makers blocking independent research on the long-term effects of their drugs, teachers' unions blocking research on teacher effectiveness - all because they want to preserve the status quo and their profits.
If nothing else gets done, this set of prohibitions has to be lifted in a permanent way.
Beavah
One of da most fascinating issues to me is that da lobbyists have succeeded in getting Congress to outlaw both data collection and research on gun safety. As a result, there's no real way to tell if more guns make for less crime, if CCW carriers are safe and help save lives, if "assault weapons" are really a problem. We are left relying on news reports from what many consider a liberally-biased media.
JMHawkins in da previous thread complains that it's just because the funding would run through the Center for Disease Control or the NIH. I expect that's because he doesn't really understand how federal grant funding works, where da department just acts as a clearinghouse for distributing grants to non-governmental (private, free market) groups to do the research. The CDC happens to be da agency that maintains the data center for the Consumer Product Safety Commission, but da CPSC is a regulatory agency not a research agency, and doesn't have da expertise to fund research. So all of da funding for consumer products research is funneled through the CDC. That avoids da inefficiency of creating ANOTHER government agency. In da same way, the National Science Foundation is da clearinghouse for stuff like science and math education research, because they have more expertise dealin' with science than da folks in the Department of Education.
What JMHawkins is missing is that Congress under lobbyist pressure has systematically prevented all agencies from funding research or gathering data on guns or gun safety. Not just the CDC.
That means that nobody is gathering systematic, nationwide data. Researchers are left with state-by-state data, if da state collected any, and usually all of it incompatible with other states.
That means that da only people doin' "research" are funded by private, special-interest lobbies or news media outlets doin' expose pieces.
Most of da issues surrounding firearms I think there are legitimate arguments or at least things to consider carefully on both sides. I have to admit, that on this particular issue I think this is just stupid and irresponsible. No other important public policy area is devoid of data and research. We want research to guide and inform our public policy choices.
What's more, it's a horrifying precedent to allow any special interest group to do that. Imagine the auto makers blocking research on transportation safety, drug makers blocking independent research on the long-term effects of their drugs, teachers' unions blocking research on teacher effectiveness - all because they want to preserve the status quo and their profits.
If nothing else gets done, this set of prohibitions has to be lifted in a permanent way.
Beavah
Comment