I’m a strong supporter of the second amendment but this kind of behavior is exactly why I’ll never join the NRA.
-
-
-
The NRA are advocates for the gun industry, not the 2nd Amendment.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There’s no such thing as “gun violence”.
-
Someone probably should have told the kids at Sandy Hook that a few years ago. Would have saved them so much embarassment.
-
Guns require human operators.
-
Omg, I've never thought about that. I just assumed that a gun stood up on it's own 2 feet and ran into the school and started shooting. This changes everything for me. So tell me more about how PEOPLE use GUNS to commit acts of violence? And why that isn't violence?
-
I wouldn’t put it past you people to actually think that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
But now that I'm enlightened about the fact that guns need someone to pull the trigger, I'm no less concerned about the harm that they cause. So what about that? Do we just *shrug gesture* and say "oh well".
-
Just stop saying “gun violence” that is all...
-
Because if we stop saying it, it stops right? "If you ignore it, it will buzz off and mind it's own business."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Don’t see how treating wounded people gives doctors any insight on the best way to prevent gun violence, including mass shootings. Doctors should be figuring out the best way to decrease medical costs without affecting patient care.
-
No, doctors should be focused on delivering the most effective treatments possible, they shouldn’t be focused on costs and cost reductions. That is the responsibility of the payer system, and America has the worst possible with employment-connected private insurance.
-
So you agree doctors should not get involved in the gun debate. That’s the main point so thanks.
-
Doctors are citizens and all citizens have a voice and a role in the gun debate. I don’t agree, thanks.
-
Obviously that’s true. The point you miss, however, is that doctors have no inherently added insight because of their profession. The media wants to imply they do. In fact doctors add no more to the debate than any other citizen. So we still agree.
-
The NRA has actively lobbied Congress since 1995 to prevent the CDC from committing medical and non-medical experts and resources to studying gun violence. There is no sensible logical fallacy you can use to deny that there is a medical point of view the NRA doesn’t want exposed.
-
Except I want tax dollars used to fund the CDC to be used for its roll of protecting the country from disease. The gun issue is not a responsibility of the CDC by any stretch. This is no more than an attempt of the anti gun lobby to try and add faux credibility to its position
-
Then why exclude existing, Federally funded, large scale data resources for quantitative analysis with prescriptive and predictive analytics to draw conclusions about medical associations of firearm violence? Data science makes qualitative assertions here irrelevant. Thanks.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@NRA wanted a battle, they got one! Now they are hiding, like all organizations when they screw up. Waiting for the storm to pass. We can’t let the storm pass.#ThisIsMyLaneThanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Securely send us news tips: