where did I ever state a % of citizens were NRA members? I simply said there are 1,000,000 more new members sines it was last at 4,000,000......which was recently.
you guys look stupid.
Gun Makers Saw No Role in Curbing Improper Sales
And a top executive for Taurus International said his company made no attempt to learn if dealers who sell its products were involved in gun trafficking on the black market. “I don’t even know what a gun trafficker is,” he said.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/28...?from=homepage
2nd Amendment?
marans!
Freedom!
Liberty!
Home invasion!
less, insecure, man-problems assholes with concealed guns!
It's all about the GUN BU$INE$$
Gun Manufacturers Fight To Protect Profits From Black Market Sales
The gun lobby likes to portray itself as the defender of the right of ordinary Americans to own guns/build giant personal arsenals for future shoot-outs with the feds. What they actually are, as I’ve said before, is an industry lobby established for the sole purpose of increasing profits for gun manufacturers. That’s why they circulate paranoid fantasies of impending government takeover amongst the right, because that’s a proven marketing strategy that increases gun sales. They like to claim they support responsible, law-abiding gun ownership, but in that comes in conflict with the profit motivation, they will choose the latter every time.
Today, the New York Times published a report about how bold gun manufacturers are about their willingness to put guns on the black market, if it increases their profits:http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/2...-market-sales/
The Glock executive testified that he would keep doing business with a gun dealer who had been indicted on a charge of violating firearms laws because “This is still America” and “You’re still innocent until proven guilty.”
The president of Sturm, Ruger was not interested in knowing how often the police traced guns back to the company’s distributors, saying it “wouldn’t show us anything.”
And a top executive for Taurus International said his company made no attempt to learn if dealers who sell its products were involved in gun trafficking on the black market. “I don’t even know what a gun trafficker is,” he said.
2nd Amendment?
marans!
Freedom!
Liberty!
Home invasion!
less, insecure, man-problem assholes with concealed guns!
It's all about the GUN BU$INE$$
Gun Researcher Turns to Crowd-Funding
Economist Bisakha Sen wants to study how US states' gun laws and gun cultures correlate with certain crimes and with firearms deaths in each state — and whether differing laws and cultures in neighboring states “spill over” to influence a state’s statistics.
But although President Barack Obama ordered the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to recommence gun research in the wake of last December's massacre of 20 schoolchildren and 6 adults in Newtown, Connecticut, federal funding for research on gun violence remains scarce so far. So Sen has turned to the crowd-funding website Microryza, and she is aiming to raise $25,000 in 100 days to fund her research.
“The research needs to be done,” says Sen, an economist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. However, she says, there is essentially no federal funding for any kind of gun-violence prevention or policy research. So when Microryza organizers sought her out several months ago and asked her to pitch a project, she decided she didn’t have much to lose by trying.
Sen’s campaign launched on 7 March. As of 29 May, she had raised $12,175 of the $25,000 that she says would fund her and two graduate students to carry out a 6-month study. Last week, Microryza extended the closing date for her effort from 31 May to 15 June.
Sen’s turn towards private donors might catch the interest of other gun-violence researchers, whose work is often stymied by the fact that the CDC has been barred, since 1996, from funding any activities that “advocate or promote” gun control. The agency has interpreted the law to mean that it cannot fund virtually any firearms research. Last year, Congress extended the prohibition to include the US National Ins utes of Health (NIH) and other agencies.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...AT_SP_20130603
symptom of a fatally diseased culture
Thanks for posting the exact same article you posted 5 days ago, dip .
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/28...?from=homepage
How much are you donating?
thinking about pulling the trigger (no pun) on a wilson tactical handgun.
but toys over 5k have to be cleared by the wife.
5K?Which model you looking at?
not sure which one i fired. pretty sure its around 5k, maybe a little more. smoothest, most accurate gun i've ever fired.5K?
They are very nice firearms but 5K seems steep even for a Wilson. They usually go for around 3,500 from what I've seen.
i think its the tactical supergrade. a little over 5k.
Clambake continues to be the biggest pimp on this site...I also have a sneaking su ion he has more money than all of us.
have you checked gunbrokerdotcom?
no, why?
ok, just looked. these are used guns, right?
They have new ones on their as well. I've sold guns on there, but have never bought one there. I'd be wary, have read about some scammers. I'd be especially wary purchasing one for the amount you are looking at.
i hear ya. i don't buy used items.
A female professor idoing gun violence research, in AL? she'll probably get raped or shot by gun fellating Confederates.
So you are doing nothing for the study you are pimping.
Not pimping for the researcher, you shameless gun pimp
Why even bring it up if you aren't donating anything to it?
as an example how NRA's chicken s have shut down all gun research and gun record keeping.
Federal Panel Lays Out The Gun Facts The NRA Has Suppressed
If Congress will lift the National Rifle Association (NRA)-funded ban on federal funding for gun research, there’s a clear research agenda for answering life-and-death questions about gun violence in the United States, according to a cross-ideological Ins ute of Medicine (IOM) panel.
The panel, convened in response to President Obama’s directive that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) develop a plan for resuming research on gun violence, was tasked with developing a list of questions about gun violence that have yet to be sufficiently examined by current research. Since the mid-90s, NRA-supported legislation has stripped the CDC of $2.5 million dollars in grant money (the exact amount devoted to gun research) and stipulated that “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”
The effects of this ban have been dramatic. Federal funding makes up 60 percent of all support for academic research, meaning that blanket ban can cripple research in a field as specific as the effects of gun violence. Indeed, fewer than 20 academics today (by one count) are actively working on a problem that results in 32,000 dead Americans per year.
As consequence, the IOM panel reports, “Basic data about gun possession, distribution, ownership, acquisition, and storage are lacking… Data that do exist are weak, making it virtually impossible to answer fundamental questions about occurrence and risk factors, or to effectively evaluate programs intended to reduce violence and harm.”
The report identifies 14 urgent “priority” areas for federal research, each of which encompasses a series of different questions about gun violence. For instance, questions that fall under the “Improve understanding of whether reducing criminal access to legally purchased guns reduces firearm violence” category include “Are there methods to enhance the reporting of stolen guns in order to reduce illegal access?” and “To what degree would mandatory reporting of transfer of private ownership of guns be effective in reducing illegal access?”
Some of the unanswered questions are even more basic. The panel suggests, for instance, that we’re not sure “to what degree can or would prospective suicidal users of firearms subs ute other methods of suicide” or “what characteristics differentiate mass shootings that were prevented from those that were carried out?”
The IOM report’s authors come from across the ideological spectrum. Its members range from Gary Kleck, one of the scholars most-cited by opponents of stronger gun laws, to Susan Sorenson, who once praised a book for “carefully and dispassionately eviscerat[ing] the research that concludes that more permissive laws about carrying concealed weapons will reduce crime.” But all could agree that the lack of basic research on “public health aspects of firearm violence” means that “makers will be left to debate controversial policies without scientifically sound evidence about their potential effects.”
Despite the gaping holes in gun research, we have strong evidence for a few claims. All things being equal, counties with more guns have more gun crime. And the best available evidence suggests that background checks significantly reduce gun homicides.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...as-suppressed/
all y'all gun fellators, NRA, and gun industry are blatantly SOFT ON GUN CRIME and GUN CRIMINALS by enabling guns to be freely, and often illegaly, widely available.
And you're a chicken who whines and complains, yet won't put your money where your mouth is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
