General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: BREAKING:10 dead, 20 injured at shooting at Umpqua Comm.College in Oregon [View all]branford
(4,462 posts)This is usually done by the USDOJ, National Institute of Justice. I should know, I worked there before attending law school.
All relevant data is normally compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the FBI, and is readily available.
There's nothing special about CDC research, and they lost most of their funding because they were engaged in transparent gun control advocacy, not research, and Congress' reaction was entirely unsurprising.
It's also inaccurate to state that the CDC does not perform research, as one they sponsored one of the most comprehensive reviews of current firearm-related research containing information widely cited by all sides of the gun control debate.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1#vii
In any event, it doesn't change the fact that about 1 in 3 Americans legally own firearms, the NRA only represents 5-6% of gun owners, and both the federal Constitution and the vast majority of state constitutions protect a right to keep and bear arms.
The issue of NRA wealth is also disingenuous. The political spending of the NRA-ILA, the lobby arm, is generally available, and not nearly as impressive as many suggest. Turning the NRA into a boogeyman is little more than a political tactic to explain gun control failures. It also doesn't explain how gun control, with ample funding, including a vocal billionaire, and numerous organizations, celebrities, and loyal politicians, still fares so badly. For instance, in the recent CO recall election, the gun control side outspent the recall supports by about 6 to 1 and still lost badly.
The simple fact is that gun rights are a big culture issue, and attempts to impose restrictions reliably manages to energize antagonistic voters. Most politicians are well aware of their constituencies and like their jobs. If the Wayne and NRA didn't exist, another organization would just take its place.