Civil Discourse Now

Where the far left and far right overlap for fun and enlightenment

Gun nuts have 14 GOP candidates in INCD5 - & then there's me.

“Self-evident truths” usually are not so “true”. Positions of the far-right idiots (such as my 14 opponents in the June 2 GOP primary for U.S. House in Indiana’s 5th Congressional District, or “INCD5") are fueled by such inanities.
A lot of times the concepts are implicit. Other times they are said out loud. An example of the former: the more guns we have, the safer we are. That notion popped into my mind yesterday when white people with assault weapons demonstrated against “stay at home.”
Positions taken by my 14 or so opponents include: Abernathy (guns are fundamental), Bales (guns protect us from tyranny), Niederberger (guns help provide protection and security), Beckwith (100% rating from the NRA), Dietzen (pro-Second Amendment).
Mitchell (will “protect the Second Amendment”), Davidson (will not support any gun control policies), Brizzi (pro-Second Amendment), Hullinger (protecting Second Amendment among most important issues), Hook (right to bear arms guaranteed by Second Amendment).
Epidemiological studies - NOT sorry if that is too pointy-headed and intellectual for some people, but epidemiology is a “branch of medicine ... deals with the incidence, distribution, and possible control of diseases and other factors relating to health.”
Mechanism of death in a shooting usually is easy to discern - dude got shot. Cause of death is more complex. In “2017, the most recent year for which complete data [are] available, 39,773 people died from gun-related injuries.” Pew Research Ctr. citing numbers from CDC.
The number of people shot by someone acting in self-defense? Number of people shot while they fought against government tyranny? Accidental shootings? We should know more, but we are prevented in that.
With nearly 40,000, deaths per year related to a specific thing, we should expect health-related studies. In 2017 approximately sixty percent (60%) of gun deaths were suicides (23,854) Hey! There is a statistic!). Any such studies have been blocked, effectively, by the NRA.
Under the Dickey Amendment, the CDC is prohibited from advocating or promoting gun control. Since 1996, even after Sandy Hook, the CDC has not funded any studies on gun violence and prevention.
Ig ignorance is bliss, then the NRA wants us to be in Nirvana. The Tiahrt Amendments ban “trace data” collected by the ATF from release for use by cities, states, researchers, litigants, and members of the public.
If we could trace guns from source - via burglaries and thefts of guns, or from gun shows - to gun deaths, we might be able to address how to reduce those numbers deaths. Lincoln said, “Let the People know the cats and the country will be safe.”
I would love to debate these matters. I have accepted invitations to debate a couple of my opponents (Beckwith, Abernathy). Beckwith even said sure, but neither ultimately replied.
One of the powers of Congress is “To promote the Progress of Science...” U.S. Const. Art. 1, sec 8. The Dickey and Tiahrt amendments would seem to run counter to The Constitution. No other advanced countries experience our numbers of deaths by guns.
Gun nuts say the number s do not mean anything. Only by peer review studies may know this with a reasonable degree of probability. In yesterday’s demonstrations, where was government oppression of the people with assault rifles?
If elected to Congress, I would seek to repeal any measures that limit the ability of CDC to sponsor studies into gun violence as a health problem. I also would aim - how’s that for a pun? - to receive a Zero Percent rating from the NRA.
To be clear: wave a Confederate flag? (oops, sorry - battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia; same difference, the flag of treasonous idiots) Think stay-at-home is a plot by the “deep state”? (It’s not - we voted it down four meetings ago) I DO NOT WANT YOUR VOTE. You have 14 other candidates perfectly suited to represent you in Congress.
I am Mark Small, a candidate for U.S. House INCD5. I favor study of deaths and injuries from guns. I do not like guns, so I never have owned one. I approve of this blog. Hell, I wrote it.

Views: 183


You need to be a member of Civil Discourse Now to add comments!

Join Civil Discourse Now

Comment by pogden297 on May 2, 2020 at 6:43pm

You're counting suicides in with people who are victims of gun crimes.  That's a bit misleading.   Pretty sure someone intent on killing themselves could find other ways of doing the deed.

I can understand opposition to the most extreme positions regarding guns.  However, I don't think proposed restrictions would do much to change the numbers.    A criminal who needs a gun to commit a crime isn't going to be dissuaded by the fact having the gun is illegal.  Further, the notion there wouldn't be a black market so a criminal wouldn't be able to get a gun is as silly as conservatives who think making marijuana illegal will  stop people from getting it.

Not everyone who owns a gun is a "gun nut."  Many of them legitimately own one for self-defense.  It's easy to not own a gun when a person lives in a safe neighborhood.  It's something else entirely when a person is living in a crime-infested neighborhood.   Let's take for example, an elderly woman  living on the southside of Chicago.  She has had her house been broken into before, and even been beaten up by intruders, maybe even sexually assaulted.  The person lives every day in fear.   Certainly not even the most left-wing politician (in their right mind) would  say she not be able to legally have a gun to defend herself.  Wait...Chicago used to have such a ridiculous law.


  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Mark Small.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

My Great Web page