America shrugs. America mourns. Lives are lost. And Congress does nothing. President Obama is trying to act. But Congress does nothing. America wants action. Congress does nothing. We are better than this.
And the corporate gun lobby is mad. They don't want any tax dollars spent on research into guns, gun violence and gun violence prevention. Check this one out if you don't believe me:
Shame on President Obama for wanting to find ways to reduce and prevent gun violence. Gun deaths and injuries only cost our country close to $40 billion every year. (Thanks to Parents Against Gun Violence for the graphic above) The costs of burying a loved one can't be measured in dollars alone. And why would we not want to do something about a national problem that is so costly in both lives and money? It just makes no sense- unless of course, protecting guns over people is the bottom line.In April, anti-gun public health researchers who spent millions conducting junk science gun control advocacy research in the 1990s, until Congress prohibited the use of federal funds for that purpose, assembled in Washington, D.C. The forum was a panel convened by the Institute of Medicine, on behalf of the CDC, to develop an agenda for gun-related issues the CDC would like to "study" on the taxpayers' dime.This week, the researchers--including many of the same people who performed the research in the 1990s--made the resulting agenda public. And what an agenda it is, consisting of a whopping 14 "priorities" and more than 50 subordinate topics, including collecting data about gun ownership, acquisition, and use; issues related to prohibiting private firearm sales; issues related to mandatory storage requirements; and the potential for mandating that guns possess "smart gun" technology--though, to its credit, the agenda recognizes that many gun owners would disable "smart" technology in the interest of improving their firearms' reliability. (Also to the panel's credit, the report recognizes that defensive gun uses are common and worthy of further study, as urged by an NRA representative at the meeting.)How $10 million would cover the vast amount of research proposed remains to be seen. Daniel Webster of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the most prolific anti-gun researchers in the public health field over the last decade, lamented to the New York Times, "given that we are in very lean budget times, the CDC will be faced with difficult decisions about setting priorities."
Where is common sense?