Cable Forum - View Single Post - Florida Shooting: 17 Students Shot dead in another Mass Shooting in the U.S

**Hugh** · 22-02-2018, 11:53

I totally agree with you, but it's not just the American psyche, it's the NRA - they've spent so long telling people the Government is coming for your guns, people believe it, when the facts don't back those statements up. The NRA needs to represent safe gun owners, not the weapons manufacturers.

The NRA always equate gun control with no one having guns - car safety regulations doesn't mean no cars, building safety regulations doesn't mean no buildings, but somehow the NRA are allowed to peddle this myth, and because they fund politicians (and fund against anyone who doesn't agree with them), they succeed.

Could you imagine the outcry if Pharma companies were allowed to supply everyday prescription and non-prescription drugs where the side-effects outweighed the benefits, and it was found that the politicians who passed the laws allowing this were receiving millions of dollars in support from the Pharma companies? They don't even allow the CDC to conduct research on gun violence - you know, so there could be unbiased evidence-based discussion...

http://theconversation.com/why-is-th...answered-92163

Quote:

In 1996, Congress passed the Dickey amendment. The legislation stated 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.” While that wording did not ban CDC gun research outright, the legislation was accompanied by a US$2.6 million budget cut. That amount happened to match the amount the CDC had spent on firearms research the previous year. The message was clear. From 1996 to 2013, CDC funding for gun research dropped by 96 percent.

The CDC wasn’t the only federal agency affected. In 2011, Congress added a similar clause to legislation that regulated funding for the National Institutes of Health. However, due to a directive from the Obama administration, the NIH continued to provide funding for gun research. That push faded as the Obama administration left office.

Earlier this year, the NIH discontinued its funding program that specifically focused on firearm violence. While firearms researchers can still apply for funding through more general NIH funding opportunities, critics say that makes funding for gun research less likely.

The Dickey amendment was passed after a CDC-funded study, led by physician and epidemiologist Arthur Kellerman, found that having a gun in the home increased homicide risk. After the results were published, the National Rifle Association pressured lawmakers, arguing that the CDC was inappropriately using its funds to advocate for gun control.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-the-us-agenda

Quote:

LaPierre is nominally subordinate to the NRA’s president but after 24 years as executive vice-president he is the real power within the organisation.

LaPierre, who earns about $1m a year, has built considerable support within the gun rights community with an aggressive interpretation of the second amendment as the virtually unrestricted right to carry a weapon and his willingness to target the government as the enemy.

He has also driven a strategy to portray gun control as part of the broader “culture war” over God, race, abortions and big government.

LaPierre’s opposition to any new form of gun control has only hardened over the years. After the Columbine school massacre in 1999, he supported background checks on buyers at gun shows. By the time of the Sandy Hook school killings three years ago, he was against it because the most vocal activists within the NRA – it claims 4 million members but only a small percentage vote – were strongly opposed...

...Ackerman McQueen designed the confrontational campaigns in favour of gun rights which went on the offensive after each mass killing in the US by portraying any new restrictions as an attempt by the government to “ban your guns”. These in turn made LaPierre hugely popular within sections of the gun rights community...

...When the leaders of an industry group, the American Shooting Sports Council (ASSC), met President Bill Clinton in 1999 to discuss curbs on automatic weapons and magazine sizes in the wake of the Columbine school massacre, Baker led the NRA pushback.

The ASSC was shut down. Its director, Robert Ricker, accused the NRA and Baker of pressuring the gun industry to disband the organisation.

“Baker controls everything,” Ricker told the authors of Outgunned: Up Against the NRA. “That has made me so angry. There are gun companies out there willing to be responsible and ready to stop illegal use of guns – more than willing. But the NRA, and Baker in particular, will not let them. Any gun company who ventures outside the fold is kicked back into line. They go along with the NRA to save their factories.”...

...Baker was instrumental in whipping Smith & Wesson into line 15 years ago after it bowed to pressure from the Clinton administration to make changes to its products, including placing locks on its handguns and “smart gun” technology that would only allow the owner to fire it.

The NRA accused Smith & Wesson of “running up the white flag of surrender”. It led a boycott of the company which cut its sales in half and nearly drove it into bankruptcy. That was the end of any cooperation between the industry and gun control advocates.

Glock, which had been talking to the Clinton White House about agreeing to similar measures, cut off discussions.

In an effort to restore sales, the Smith & Wesson management was forced out. The company’s new president sought out Baker and had a photograph taken with him which the company sent to gun dealers across the US.

Smith & Wesson’s sales bounced back and it is now a major financial contributor to the NRA.