Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Washington, DC – Rember that time a report from 2013 commissioned by President Barack Obama, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) found that the use of firearms for self-defense was and is a significant crime deterrent.
The report, titled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” * notes that most firearm incidents do not result in a fatality and that violent crimes, including homicides, have declined in the past five years. It also highlights that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.
The 2013 report expressed uncertainty about gun control measures, stating that there is no evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violent crimes and that proposed “gun turn-in programs are ineffective.” Instead, the CDC report proposes gun safety technologies such as “external locking devices and biometric systems” to reduce firearm-related deaths.
Commenting at the time, John Frazer, from the National Rifle Association, had this to say;
“I thought it was very telling that this report focused so heavily on . . . futuristic technology that’s not been brought to the market in any kind of reliable form that consumers have any interest in,” said John Frazer, director of research and information at the National Rifle Association (NRA).”
“These “smart gun” technologies are “designed to prevent misuse, to prevent either accidents or crimes committed with stolen guns,” Frazer noted. “Obviously it wouldn’t have any effect on crimes committed with a gun purchased by the criminal. It obviously wouldn’t have any effect on suicides by people who bought the guns themselves.” However, “it could have a huge burden on self-defense rights of law-abiding people if they’re forced to use an unproven technology.”
However, there has been criticism of the study from some quarters, with concerns expressed that the research may be used to promote gun control.
“The anti-gun researchers out there who want to study and promote gun control are perfectly free to get funded to do that by [New York] Mayor Bloomberg or by any number of other organizations or foundations,” said Frazer. “It depends on who’s doing the research. I would be very concerned that a lot of the follow-up research that might come from this agenda would be more of what we’ve seen from the anti-gun public health establishment in the past.”
The report establishes guidelines meant only for future “taxpayer-funded research,” Frazer said. At the time, the Annie E. Casey Foundation issued a statement reaffirming its support for the study, which “is in keeping with our work to collaborate with public agencies, nonprofit organizations, policymakers, and community leaders to make a positive impact on the lives of kids, families, and communities.” Other supporters of the CDC study include The California Endowment, The Joyce Foundation, on whose Board of Directors Obama served for eight years prior to his Senate run, and Kaiser Permanente, which contributed over half a million dollars to his presidential campaigns.
African American males are most affected by firearm-related violence, with “32 per 100,000” deaths. Risk factors and predictors of violence include income inequality, “diminished economic opportunities . . . high levels of family disruption” and “low levels of community participation.”
This review of the CDC study underscores the importance of firearms for self-defense and as a crime deterrent. It recommends gun safety technologies as a means of reducing firearm-related deaths, rather than gun control measures. Despite the findings in his report, we can most certainly count on the biased MSM to only promote gun control as a solution to the out-of-control crime in 2023.
*Source “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence”