The case can certainly be made that guns are a public health issue and if the CDC managed to get rid of all guns reduce the total number of deaths in this country.

Oh I didn't realize we are talking about silly stuff now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_Pot

Some people apparently support him.  Are you included?

Oh, you were talking about a person using his formal name!

Maybe Caps and spacing would have been a better choice than "too lazy to give a shyt."

BTW, he's dead.  No way to support him even if I did.

The case can certainly be made that guns are a public health issue and if the CDC managed to get rid of all guns reduce the total number of deaths in this country.

The case could be made that people are the biggest  threat to public health and safety. And you can go look up the FBI crime statistics and see there is a group that is only 14% of the population but commits 50% of the violent crimes? Should we get rid of them?

The case could be made that people are the biggest  threat to public health and safety. And you can go look up the FBI crime statistics and see there is a group that is only 14% of the population but commits 50% of the violent crimes? Should we get rid of them?

Yes please.

The case can certainly be made that guns are a public health issue and if the CDC managed to get rid of all guns reduce the total number of deaths in this country.

BUT

The CDC would probably save even more lives if they got rid of alcohol
AND
I don't think it is acceptable to lose the check and balance against government abuse even if we save more lives in total.

Even if the CDC or administration decided to label guns a public health issue, that solves nothing.  Cigarettes are a public health issue.  What has that accomplished?  The gov't still subsidizes the tobacco industry then turns around and heavily taxes consumers.

Given that the number of people able to defend themselves is more than all those killed with a gun (including the 60% of that number deemed suicides), the net result of getting rid of guns would be more people becoming victims of crime.  Given that some estimates say that as many as 3 million defensive use of guns occur in the US annually, and 30K die from gunshot, the likelihood is that the "cure" will be worse than the "disease".

We could use the same criteria to designate other things as public health "issues":

Automobiles
Aircraft
Boats
Bicycles
Motorcycles
Swimming Pools
Knives
Ball Bats
The Homeless
Obesity
Video Games
Sitting at a desk all day
Too much salt
Walking across the street
etc.

The same way a DA can indict a "ham sandwich", the CDC can label almost anything a "public health issue." 

It's not the CDC's role to control public behavior or ownership of property that they deem "harmful".  Centers for DISEASE CONTROL, not Centers for Public Health.

Weaponizing the CDC against the second amendment is what this is about, not safety or saving lives.  Gun control has not stopped a single mass shooting.  CA has the strictest laws.  They also have had the most mass shootings.  Maybe the CDC needs to start there to see if the problem is with gangs, drug culture, and fewer people able to defend themselves with guns.

Yes please.

I'm good with that.

I've been told many times I'm not "people".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_Pot

Some people apparently support him.  Are you included?

My comment was about "emptying the cities" as a tactic.
I don't believe I subscribed to his other tactics.
That would make me a Democrat party member.
You know Da kine, kill off the white man, anti-christian( Pol Pot was a Buddhist)
anti- technology, wanted an agrarian society( low carbon foot print) and above all,
Government is GOOD!( as long as he was the government).
 
CDC is Evil and has no good intentions as does any government agency.
All they want is to make a perfect world for them and screw everybody else.

The case could be made that people are the biggest  threat to public health and safety. And you can go look up the FBI crime statistics and see there is a group that is only 14% of the population but commits 50% of the violent crimes? Should we get rid of them?

.....
Just imagine vaccinating that 14% with the 3-part vaccine.
It would cut the crime rate in half. It would also eliminate spawning new criminals.
Sounds like a winner to me.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_injection#:~:text=Drugs-,Conventional%20lethal%20injection%20protocol,heart%2C%20and%20midazolam%20for%20sedation.

Oh lord, my 14 /50 question was meant to make a point about stopping the walking towards cliffs the left keeps doing, I wasnt taking a poll. Sure looks like 8 yrs of Obama and 4 years of BLM burning cities set back race relations in the US 5 decades.

Oh lord, my 14 /50 question was meant to make a point about stopping the walking towards cliffs the left keeps doing, I wasnt taking a poll. Sure looks like 8 yrs of Obama and 4 years of BLM burning cities set back race relations in the US 5 decades.

Personally I think race relations are just fine.  We have significant cultural and political differences today,
that preclude peaceful co-existence. We have one culture,  your 14% that are predominately Democrat.
that have a free rein from the Party.  Problem lies in the Party.  That Party thinks it can do as it pleases regardless
of other cultural values and that isn't going too work well for long.

Personally I think race relations are just fine.  We have significant cultural and political differences today,
that preclude peaceful co-existence. We have one culture,  your 14% that are predominately Democrat.
that have a free rein from the Party.  Problem lies in the Party.  That Party thinks it can do as it pleases regardless
of other cultural values and that isn't going too work well for long.

I still think Obama and BLM did massive damage to the perception of Black folks in America. Race Hustlers have not ever once made anything better for their communities, they only ever lined their own pockets and fed their personal narcissism.

Even if the CDC or administration decided to label guns a public health issue, that solves nothing.  Cigarettes are a public health issue.  What has that accomplished?  The gov't still subsidizes the tobacco industry then turns around and heavily taxes consumers.

Given that the number of people able to defend themselves is more than all those killed with a gun (including the 60% of that number deemed suicides), the net result of getting rid of guns would be more people becoming victims of crime.  Given that some estimates say that as many as 3 million defensive use of guns occur in the US annually, and 30K die from gunshot, the likelihood is that the "cure" will be worse than the "disease".

We could use the same criteria to designate other things as public health "issues":

Automobiles
Aircraft
Boats
Bicycles
Motorcycles
Swimming Pools
Knives
Ball Bats
The Homeless
Obesity
Video Games
Sitting at a desk all day
Too much salt
Walking across the street
etc.

The same way a DA can indict a "ham sandwich", the CDC can label almost anything a "public health issue." 

It's not the CDC's role to control public behavior or ownership of property that they deem "harmful".  Centers for DISEASE CONTROL, not Centers for Public Health.

Weaponizing the CDC against the second amendment is what this is about, not safety or saving lives.  Gun control has not stopped a single mass shooting.  CA has the strictest laws.  They also have had the most mass shootings.  Maybe the CDC needs to start there to see if the problem is with gangs, drug culture, and fewer people able to defend themselves with guns.

Of course the CDC could call anything a health crisis and it is rather dumb, just a advertising campaign basically but my comment was about if they somehow were able to do what they wanted and get rid of guns.

What would probably have more effect on crime though would be the "public health crisis" of children raised without fathers.

Of course the CDC could call anything a health crisis and it is rather dumb, just a advertising campaign basically but my comment was about if they somehow were able to do what they wanted and get rid of guns.

What would probably have more effect on crime though would be the "public health crisis" of children raised without fathers.

I responded to that point.  DUG > All Gun Deaths. 

Getting rid of all guns would tip the scale in favor of violent criminals, as victims become less able to defend themselves.

I responded to that point.  DUG > All Gun Deaths. 

Getting rid of all guns would tip the scale in favor of violent criminals, as victims become less able to defend themselves.

DUG?

There is no reason to believe that if all legal guns dissapeared overnight that we would be suddenly awash in murders. Crime syndicates in other countries can get guns but they don't have near our gun murder rate. Japan isn't awash in gun murders, the UK isn't awash in gun murders, etc etc. Might robberies increase? Sure, that is a possibility. If you get rid of legal guns that also means that illegal guns will decrease because most illegal guns come from somewhere that started legal (gun factories). I don't think we should try to squirm through this argument, I can concede that if firearms were completely outlawed that we may see a decrease in murder and suicide rates yet still rebut the argument by pointing out that it would mean sacrificing the ability to protect all our other great freedoms from a tyrannical government.

The Center for Disease Control. Hmm what diseases have they controlled? Can their methodologies for controlling such diseases be cross overed into LE for "gun control" ? Millions of LE as well as politicians of course would be really, really interested.

History of the CDC
On July 1, 1946 the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) opened its doors and occupied one floor of a small building in Atlanta. Its primary mission was simple yet highly challenging: prevent malaria from spreading across the nation. Armed with a budget of only $10 million and fewer than 400 employees, the agency’s early challenges included obtaining enough trucks, sprayers, and shovels necessary to wage war on mosquitoes.

As the organization took root deep in the South, once known as the heart of the malaria zone, CDC Founder Dr. Joseph Mountin continued to advocate for public health issues and to push for CDC to extend its responsibilities to other communicable diseases. He was a visionary public health leader with high hopes for this small and, at that time, relatively insignificant branch of the Public Health Service. In 1947, CDC made a token payment of $10 to Emory University for 15 acres of land on Clifton Road in Atlanta that now serves as CDC headquarters. The new institution expanded its focus to include all communicable diseases and to provide practical help to state health departments when requested.

Although medical epidemiologists were scarce in those early years, disease surveillance became the cornerstone of CDC’s mission of service to the states and over time changed the practice of public health. There have been many significant accomplishments since CDC’s humble beginnings. The following highlights some of CDC’s important achievements for improving public health worldwide.

Today, CDC is one of the major operating components of the Department of Health and Human Services and is recognized as the nation’s premiere health promotion, prevention, and preparedness agency.

CDC Leader
Rochelle P. Walensky, MD, MPH, is the 19th Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the ninth Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. She is an influential scholar whose pioneering research has helped advance the national and global response to HIV/AIDS. Dr. Walensky is also a well-respected expert on the value of testing and treatment of deadly viruses.

Dr. Walensky served as Chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Massachusetts General Hospital from 2017-2020 and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School from 2012-2020. She served on the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic and conducted research on vaccine delivery and strategies to reach underserved communities.

Dr. Walensky is recognized internationally for her work to improve HIV screening and care in South Africa and nationally recognized for motivating health policy and informing clinical trial design and evaluation in a variety of settings.

She is a past Chair of the Office of AIDS Research Advisory Council at the National Institutes of Health, Chair-elect of the HIV Medical Association, and previously served as an advisor to both the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS.

Originally from Maryland, Dr. Walensky received her Bachelor of Arts from Washington University in St. Louis, her Doctor of Medicine from the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and her Masters in Public Health from the Harvard School of Public Health.


In short, the CDC is the wrong organization to tell us about guns. Why not have the restaurant association tell us about healthy eating? Or how about the FDA talk to us about free speech?
It's not Biden that is dumb his administration and puppet masters are dumb.

DUG?

There is no reason to believe that if all legal guns dissapeared overnight that we would be suddenly awash in murders. Crime syndicates in other countries can get guns but they don't have near our gun murder rate. Japan isn't awash in gun murders, the UK isn't awash in gun murders, etc etc. Might robberies increase? Sure, that is a possibility. If you get rid of legal guns that also means that illegal guns will decrease because most illegal guns come from somewhere that started legal (gun factories). I don't think we should try to squirm through this argument, I can concede that if firearms were completely outlawed that we may see a decrease in murder and suicide rates yet still rebut the argument by pointing out that it would mean sacrificing the ability to protect all our other great freedoms from a tyrannical government.

Anyone who puts the two words "gun" and "murder" together has already decided that the problem that causes murders is guns.

So, here you are falling for the anti-gun tactic.  You're so focused on guns, you aren't looking at the root causes of violence.

Sounds like you believe disarming the country of legal guns will solve the problem because "no more gun crimes."

Maine has about the same population as Hawaii.  They also have Constitutional Carry for firearms.  No permit is required for concealed carry.  That law became effective Oct 2015.  Prior to that, Maine was a "Shall Issue" state for CCW Permits.  I have one for non-resident -- expired because I no longer have a need for it.

Maine also has a lower per capital murder rate:  Maine = 1.79, Hawaii = 2.53.  (2018 stats)

As long as there are real world examples where "less strict gun laws" equals fewer murders -- including "gun murders" -- you will never be able to prove your theory applies to every city, state or nation.

it's not the guns.  Every exception to your rule is another case for the Second Amendment to remain.

The root cause of all this crime is MURDER Put anything in front of that and it's just a condiment. Human behavior is something we can never address. All the laws in the world. All the heartfelt wishes. WE are the real reason behind crime.

The root cause of all this crime is MURDER Put anything in front of that and it's just a condiment. Human behavior is something we can never address. All the laws in the world. All the heartfelt wishes. WE are the real reason behind crime.

Exactly.  And once you accept that fact -- that no laws will ever prevent violence in any society by any and all means -- you have to then ask the obvious follow-on question:

How do we protect ourselves once the government laws and bans have failed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

My answer is and always has been:  be prepared to apply equal or greater force when confronted with violence.

The people who want to take your guns are the same ones who looked the other way when the Miske/Kealoha criminal syndicate was poisoning dance floors with Vikane and dumping bodies of their victims in the ocean.

Your health and safety mean nothing to them.

Funny things is folks point to Japan and its lack of Guns to its low crime rate, they ignore the fact they have a ton of stabbings instead and more than a few times a year someone goes off their rocker and does some kind of mass poisoning event instead of using a carbine. The Aum Shinrikyo gas attack wasnt much of a cultural anomaly.