To Counter Gun Violence, Researchers Seek Deeper Data

[Captain Obvious]

Barking up the right tree? Wrong tree? Not even in the same forest?

I think it's wrong tree/wrong forest, otherwise right approach.

Perusing the comments left below the article, like me many were disappointed with this idea for a number of reasons, plus the usual pro & anti gun nut bedshitting rhetoric.

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/28/352036040/to-counter-gun-violence-researchers-seek-deeper-data


It remains to be seen if the same thing can be done for gun violence. But to start with, the CDC has begun offering more than $7 million in grants to states to expand the agency's National Violent Death Reporting System. The hope is that will also capture more data on firearm fatalities.

[iustitia]

More information isn't a bad thing in my view. I don't know if it's worth seven million fuckin dollars but it sounds interesting.

[Private Pickle]

Another national database. Exactly what we need...

[iustitia]

Upon reexamining this, why the fuck is the CDC the one doing this? Wouldn't that be more Department of Justice than Disease Control?

[Private Pickle]

Upon reexamining this, why the fuck is the CDC the one doing this? Wouldn't that be more Department of Justice than Disease Control?

It's September. End of Government Fiscal Year. Everyone is justifying their budgets.

[Captain Obvious]

Upon reexamining this, why the fuck is the CDC the one doing this? Wouldn't that be more Department of Justice than Disease Control?

Maybe because violence (gun, other) is a psycho-social issue.

[Adelaide]

Maybe because violence (gun, other) is a psycho-social issue.

The CDC isn't just concerned with diseases and illnesses, mental or physical. They also examine injury prevention, occupational health, and health promotion. So, it makes sense they'd do the study.

[Chris]

The hope is that will also capture more data on firearm fatalities.

Suffers selection bias.

Yesterday's discussion about gun control led to a number of studies done of victims of crime to show, for example, Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html#.VCmSHvldXUU). Data on victims of crimes will naturally be biased toward such a conclusion.

If you want to dig deeper you need to look at all people, especially those not victims of crime, especially those who keep and bear arms.

[Polecat]

I disagree with the notion that the CDC use any of its resources outside the scope of biological pathogens. A comprehensive database of gun related injury & death has absolutely no use in preparing for a pandemic. It is a useful tool for other agencies that might be used to make rational decisions related to the scourge of gun violence which in no way comes close to the carnage wrought by the automobile. Should the CDC spend another 7 mil on this as well?

This is just another example of a bloated government agency further expanding itself.

[Peter1469]

I am not sure what more data is going to get them. I think we have pretty good ideas about gun violence and its causes. Then politics gets in the way and nothing sensible gets done.

I expect more of the same.