Almost thirty years ago, before Columbine, before Sandy Hook, before Uvalde, two physicians cum researchers, Art Kellerman, and Fred Rivara, published studies which identified guns in the home as a medical risk. And the risk wasn’t some fever or rash. The risk was death.
Know a more serious medical risk? I don’t.
Not only did Kellerman and Rivara define the medical risk caused by access to guns, but the risk wasn’t qualified or lessened if the guns were safely stored, or if the gun owner was more ‘responsible,’ or anything else. Guns equal medical risk. Or to quote Grandpa, ‘prust und prushit’ (read: that’s enough of that.)
What has happened since those articles appeared? The gun industry and their supporters have denied the whole thing, but why would they do anything else? They want to sell guns. And tobacco companies want to sell cigarettes. Fine. Good for them.
On the other hand, you would expect that the medical and public health communities would respond to the identification of guns as a health risk by saying what they are supposed to say about any risk to health, which is – get rid of the risk.
So, here we go again with another debate about guns provoked by yet another savage, mass assault in a school, and what are we hearing from doctors and public health researchers?
We are hearing that we have to find some ways to prevent those mass slaughters from happening but oh, by the way, law-abiding adults should still be able to own a gun.
I have been listening to this same bullsh*t now for more than twenty-five years, and frankly, my friends in medicine and public health, along with my friends in all those gun-control organizations who say the same thing should be ashamed of themselves.
You don’t identify a risk to health and then try to figure out a way to make people healthier but still keep the risk in place.
Am I missing something here? I don’t think so.
Ands the best of all are those physicians who go around claiming that we can reduce the risk from guns by getting together with gun owners and coming up with a ‘consensus’ approach that will protect everyone from getting shot but at the same time allow potential shooters to keep their guns.
Do the so-called experts in medicine and public health who promote such nonsense actually believe here’s a single gun nut out there who thinks that Mike Bloomberg is all of a sudden interested in protecting their ‘rights?’ Give me a break.
Yea, yea, I know that Americans own somewhere between 300 million and 400 million guns. So what? Most of these guns happen to be guns that have never figured in any kind of gun violence at all. The guns which cause gun violence – semi-automatic, hi-capacity handguns and rifles – weren’t even sold until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s.
How many of those 400 million guns which comprise the current civilian arsenal were manufactured before 1978? Plenty. And let’s not forget that guns aren’t like cars. They don’t wear out.
And by the way, ATF already makes a distinction between guns that are used for killing human beings as opposed to guns that are used for hunting and sport. Want to import a gun from overseas which doesn’t meet the ATF’s requirements for being a ‘sporting’ gun? You can’t.
Why do you think Glock makes their guns in Georgia, Sig has a factory in New Hampshire and Beretta has a factory in Accokeek, MD? That’s where they make the kinds of guns that are used to kill and injure 300 Americans every day. Sorry, but Grandpa’s old shotgun rusting away in a corner of the garage isn’t a threat to health.
Either we get rid of the guns which are a risk to health, or we don’t. And it’s about time that the physicians and public health researchers who posture themselves as ‘experts’ on gun violence stop looking for easy answers which will do nothing and start making arguments based on the facts.
Jun 10, 2022 @ 21:00:42
A Modest Proposal to Prevent Future School Shootings
To put an end to the recurrent, contentious arguments about guns the following would seem eminently logical. The federal government should provide to each child born in America a free semi-automatic handgun or assault rifle. The choice could be left to the parents and would be recorded on the birth certificates. These would have to be U.S manufactured weapons (no Glocks or Berettas) to support our local industries (Smith and Wesson, Remington etc.). This would be egalitarian, universal and level the “playing field”, liberals would therefore approve. While Mr. Trump, Governor Abbott, and Senator Cruz have all recommend “hardening” schools into virtual fortresses by hiring 400,000-500,000 armed guards I believe that this plan would be much more cost effective and would have multiple side benefits.
At baptisms and baby showers gifts could include high capacity magazines, special telescopic sights, silencers or hollow point ammunition. Starting with pre-school violent shooting video games would be encouraged to improve marksmanship, truly a life prolonging, lifetime skill. As the children got older they could sharpen their negotiating skills using these weapons in real time. They would learn to settle all arguments directly on a one on one basis. Of course teachers would always have to wear full body tactical armor in class and especially on the playground in case bullying got out of hand. Applying to college would include the new SAT’s (Shooting Aptitude Tests). What admissions office, even those at elite, coastal and Ivy League schools, would dare turn down an applicant with a perfect SAT?
The tax savings would be phenomenal! Libertarians and conservatives would be in heaven. Once this system was fully implemented we could do away with police departments (the ultimate defunding strategy) and all court systems. Everyone would become their own personal vigilante enforcer. We would no longer need the military, so could eliminate the Army, Navy, Marines and Air force. Neither Russia nor China nor even North Korea would dare launch a nuclear or biological attack with 350,000 heavily armed Americans waiting to strike back.
For anyone who does not want to wait for this program to be adopted, the military is hiring and will enhance your second amendment rights. As an old vet, I can promise you that. If you can’t pass the physical, there is always the NRA. I believe that they do have lower membership requirements. I am sure they will welcome you.
ENJOY! Jim Webster
Jun 11, 2022 @ 10:01:32
Couldn’t agree with you more Jim. You and Archie would have been best friends.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-lDb0Dn8OXE
As for the guns — semi-automatic, hi-capacity handguns, and rifles — weren’t even sold until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s, what about the Girardoni?
Jun 11, 2022 @ 12:14:31
“semi-automatic, hi-capacity handguns and rifles – weren’t even sold until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s.”
-Mike
…..In 1896, Paul Mauser introduced the first model of his Mauser “Broomhandle” semi-automatic pistol, the C96. This was the first mass-produced and commercially successful pistol to have a large-capacity, staggered-column magazine holding up to 20 rounds.”
Jun 11, 2022 @ 17:09:07
Jim, listen really close to what this man has to say.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NCqtfFaTZ6Q
Maybe the federal government should give each child born in America a free semi-automatic handgun and/or assault rifle.
Abakua abakua Jim…
Jun 11, 2022 @ 12:39:01
Guess we also shouldn’t mention the Browning Hi-Power (1935), or how a quick Google search will show Print Ads for the guns sale to the American public in 1960…..