CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Hoosier8, Aug 24, 2013.

  1. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
  2. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Could you link to the actual study. Not that I disagree, I just prefer to read the original source as bloggers and editorials are notorious for spin and that author doesn't even bother to link to the study which means he is a rank amateur and I don't trust him.
     
  3. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
  4. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK thanks.......nuts its not free though. I thought government studies were free to the public at least the ones I have looked at have been. I know the CDC study done back during the Bush administration was free although that was years ago.

    Edit: nm.......DUH! there is a free online version.
     
  5. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    92,699
    Likes Received:
    74,137
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Let us START with the title

    "priorities for research to reduce the threat of fire-arm related violence"

    Actually does NOT sound like it is actually either a) an actual research paper or b) would contain the conclusions that the editorial mentioned in the OP maintains that it does
     
  6. DoneEatingGrass

    DoneEatingGrass Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I don't know, I think that pretty much started an interest for me to read, then when they posted the other details...kinda clinched it for me. Seems pretty straight forward.
     
  7. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    hardly an editorial or anecdotal exploration. Pretty definitive
    The second link ( http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page= ) Gives the report in its entirety.
    Already attacking a good source.............why is that? Just because you don't want to accept it?
     

Share This Page