A blog dedicated to the rational discussion of politics and current events.
Of course the big question comes to what is defined as sensible.One great argument has been about speed limits, many were first imposed back when cars had primitive suspensions and drum brakes on two wheels. Today most cars have tuned independent suspensions four-wheel disk breaks and considerably better tires (the plot element of a tire blow-out from old movies has become a rarity these days as well, not to mention run-flat tires).Of course these data points are as well discussed nationally as guns,
Cars are safer, roadways are safer in design and materials -- ALL that happened because people learned from safety studies and from treating vehicular accidents as a public health issue.Gun huggers, gun manufacturers and the extreme leadership of the NRA which does not represent the body of members wishes all oppose any study that would lead to changes reducing gun violence. They are terrified of what those studies are finding, so they try to suppress them.So, NO, these are not as well discussed nationally as guns.
The issue of funding is ONLY on using PUBLIC funds. Further the CDC data as well as the FBI data is public information (minus of course individual information for the sake of privacy). Nothing is stopping anybody from doing studies.
Lack of funding is stopping studies. Lack of funding is even stopping collecting some data by the FBI and the CDC. There is no legitimate reason not to permit public funding of such studies, much less the denial of public funds to academic research to do so.Let's not pretend that there is not a coordinated effort to obstruct data gathering, including but not limited to public funding. We publicly fund every other area of public health.Gun huggers and gun manufacturers are scared shitless of what that studying and research will reveal and the recommendations that will result.