CDC wasting time with studying gun violence

[Dan Druff]

You'd think the CDC would be really busy for the past 20 months, but apparently not.

They have enough idle time to study gun violence as a supposed "public health epidemic". Because, you know, there are lots of people dying from gun-related diseases.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/27/healt...sky/index.html

Why is the CDC getting involved here? They need to be studying diseases -- especially COVID -- and providing recommendations. There should be enough work in this area since early 2020 to where they shouldn't have idle time to start branching out with bullshit political quests which have nothing to do with disease.

But here we are. The CDC first tries to take control of the eviction moratorium (lol), and now they're wasting time and resources on gun violence studies.

When you think of the US gun violence problem, do you ever think of the CDC as the organization most fit to address it? You don't? Well, that's a shock.

So what is this about?

Director Rochelle Walensky is a liberal Democrat who is highly political, and is attempting to legislate through her organization -- even in matters where the CDC doesn't have any business. Whether you agree with her politics or concern about gun violence, this isn't her job, and she's neglecting her very important main job right now.

And they wonder why American trust of the CDC is at an all-time low.

[Dan Druff]

Anyway, if Rochelle Walensky is having a hard time understanding what we should do about the gun violence epidemic in the US, I can solve that for her right now.

1) Aggressively investigate, arrest, and prosecute perpetrators of violent crime

2) Hand them stiff sentences, and don't search for excuses to be lenient

3) Give especially long sentences to repeat violent criminals

4) Make it known to everyone that the above will be happening, and that you'll be living most of (or all) your life in jail if you become a career violent criminal


There you go. That will significantly reduce violent crime, without having to take away people's guns.

You're welcome.

That will be $10,000,000, please.

[splitthis]

She is a dirty cunt for sure. It’s all about control and attempting to take away the power of the people. They will FAIL.

[gimmick]

Yea the annual budget for CDC and NIH is about 50 billion, but we are all very sad that Donald Trump signed a spending bill that gave them a shared 25 million to waste for this totally not a real problem. In case anyone is wondering this amounts to 1/2000 share of the budget.

And obv all this started before Biden appointed a new head of CDC. It's all hidden in the article that Druff is spinning.

"In 2018, then President Donald Trump signed a government spending bill that allowed the CDC to conduct gun violence research, and in 2020 and 2021 Congress agreed to millions of dollars for gun violence research for the first time in decades, allocating $25 million split between the CDC and the US National Institutes of Health."

I know this is hard to understand, but CDC and NIH do more than one thing on any given year.

[Dan Druff]

Yea the annual budget for CDC and NIH is about 50 billion, but we are all very sad that Donald Trump signed a spending bill that gave them a shared 25 million to waste for this totally not a real problem. In case anyone is wondering this amounts to 1/2000 share of the budget.

And obv all this started before Biden appointed a new head of CDC. It's all hidden in the article that Druff is spinning.

"In 2018, then President Donald Trump signed a government spending bill that allowed the CDC to conduct gun violence research, and in 2020 and 2021 Congress agreed to millions of dollars for gun violence research for the first time in decades, allocating $25 million split between the CDC and the US National Institutes of Health."

I know this is hard to understand, but CDC and NIH do more than one thing on any given year.

Where did I say anything about Biden?

I said the CDC is wasting precious time and resources on gun violence research, and now the director is doing interviews with CNN, crowing about it.

[gimmick]

Yea the annual budget for CDC and NIH is about 50 billion, but we are all very sad that Donald Trump signed a spending bill that gave them a shared 25 million to waste for this totally not a real problem. In case anyone is wondering this amounts to 1/2000 share of the budget.

And obv all this started before Biden appointed a new head of CDC. It's all hidden in the article that Druff is spinning.

"In 2018, then President Donald Trump signed a government spending bill that allowed the CDC to conduct gun violence research, and in 2020 and 2021 Congress agreed to millions of dollars for gun violence research for the first time in decades, allocating $25 million split between the CDC and the US National Institutes of Health."

I know this is hard to understand, but CDC and NIH do more than one thing on any given year.

Where did I say anything about Biden?

I said the CDC is wasting precious time and resources on gun violence research, and now the director is doing interviews with CNN, crowing about it.

You didn't and i never said you did. This is what you said...

"Director Rochelle Walensky is a liberal Democrat who is highly political, and is attempting to legislate through her organization -- even in matters where the CDC doesn't have any business. Whether you agree with her politics or concern about gun violence, this isn't her job, and she's neglecting her very important main job right now."

...implying that this is happening because of Rochelle Walensky. This predates her. Do you understand how time works?

This is her job and she's neglecting fuckall. Take 1 percent. Divide it by 20. What you have are the funds that are allocated to this. If we assume that employees follow the same ratio, then out of 30k CDC/NIH employees, grand total of 15 people are working on this. Here's a super secret secret, 30k people never worked on Covid.

Apparently gun violence was a thing CDC was researching over 25 years ago. They didn't exactly solve it back then.

For reference how massive that 25 million is, NRA spent more in 2020 elections. They spent more than twice as much in 2016.

[Kalam]

I mean, gun violence is a problem. But it isn't one that Democrats are the slightest bit capable of addressing honestly because reality is inconvenient to their preferred narratives.

They will make a big show about the NRA and the need for stricter gun laws, and probably through in some social justice terms like "white supremacy". And completely ignore the reality much gun violence occurs in Democratically controlled "urban" settings with illegally owned guns.

And even on top of Covid, the real public health epidemic that needs to be addressed that both parties refuse to acknowledge for political reasons is the obesity epidemic.

[Kalam]

For reference how massive that 25 million is, NRA spent more in 2020 elections. They spent more than twice as much in 2016.

I'll give you a pass because you are not American. But the NRA has very little (if anything) to do with the gun violence epidemic in the US. It is just a political boogeyman. And the second someone says NRA that is a clear sign they have no interest in addressing the issue honestly, and it isn't worth listening any further.

And the more the Democratic Party wastes everyones time gaslighting us about the NRA, the worse and worse the problem is going to get.

[gimmick]

Anyway, if Rochelle Walensky is having a hard time understanding what we should do about the gun violence epidemic in the US, I can solve that for her right now.

1) Aggressively investigate, arrest, and prosecute perpetrators of violent crime

2) Hand them stiff sentences, and don't search for excuses to be lenient

3) Give especially long sentences to repeat violent criminals

4) Make it known to everyone that the above will be happening, and that you'll be living most of (or all) your life in jail if you become a career violent criminal


There you go. That will significantly reduce violent crime, without having to take away people's guns.

You're welcome.

That will be $10,000,000, please.

They've tried all that multiple times. It doesn't work.

The problems with your solutions is that you draw from your experiences and personality.

It's not even a race issue. Just mentioning it because that would have been the dumbest interpretation of the above sentence.

You're just really bad at relating to other people's circumstances and mindset. It's not slight that you haven't been spending a whole lot of time with street criminals, but if you had, you would know why your solutions don't do anything to prevent crime.

The current generation that's doing most of the killings in the US already know they will die in the streets or be locked up for life. They don't even expect to live to 30 even when they are sober. When they were 12 they already knew dozens of relatives or their friends relatives that were killed or locked up. That realization isn't new to them.

[dwai]

does gimmick work for the fucking cdc or what

I've never seen a bigger faggot defend a government funded propaganda machine more than this queer

[Sanlmar]

does gimmick work for the fucking cdc or what

I've never seen a bigger faggot defend a government funded propaganda machine more than this queer

Why you always killing debate? Druff and Gimmick putting on a good show

[splitthis]

Instead of worrying about guns, that cunt should worry about obesity in this country, something that actually causes DISEASE.

Unfortunately, most all government agencies have lost all credibility due to their wayward political views.

You got some sheep to follow, but many are wise to their idiotic agendas.

[Dan Druff]

Anyway, if Rochelle Walensky is having a hard time understanding what we should do about the gun violence epidemic in the US, I can solve that for her right now.

1) Aggressively investigate, arrest, and prosecute perpetrators of violent crime

2) Hand them stiff sentences, and don't search for excuses to be lenient

3) Give especially long sentences to repeat violent criminals

4) Make it known to everyone that the above will be happening, and that you'll be living most of (or all) your life in jail if you become a career violent criminal


There you go. That will significantly reduce violent crime, without having to take away people's guns.

You're welcome.

That will be $10,000,000, please.

They've tried all that multiple times. It doesn't work.

The problems with your solutions is that you draw from your experiences and personality.

It's not even a race issue. Just mentioning it because that would have been the dumbest interpretation of the above sentence.

You're just really bad at relating to other people's circumstances and mindset. It's not slight that you haven't been spending a whole lot of time with street criminals, but if you had, you would know why your solutions don't do anything to prevent crime.

The current generation that's doing most of the killings in the US already know they will die in the streets or be locked up for life. They don't even expect to live to 30 even when they are sober. When they were 12 they already knew dozens of relatives or their friends relatives that were killed or locked up. That realization isn't new to them.

My solutions would indeed bring crime way down, and indeed a form of these were implemented in the 1990s, and we saw a stretch of about 23 years where crime steadily fell. It's been on the way back up ever since the Ferguson shooting, and the attitude toward police and policing changed.

Even if you don't believe that these solutions would deter crime, it would prevent it simply by keeping the criminals off the streets for longers. A high percentage of major violent crime is committed by those with an existing violent criminal history. The current approach by the left is to keep cycling these people back on the street quickly, and repeatedly doing so until they do something really really awful.

Reducing the general presence of a violent criminal element also reduces violent crime from marginal types -- the ones who aren't necessarily terrible people, but are subject to being highly influenced by their surrounding environment. It's not too different than observing how two class troublemakers can cause other kids in the class to behave worse, or how two a few bad employees can spark bad behavior by other employees. Many people subconsciously adapt to the norms around them.

In any case, the solution to gun violence is to focus upon the people using the guns for illegal purposes, not the guns themselves. The left doesn't want to do that, because it will lead them to incarcerating more people of color.

[gimmick]

They've tried all that multiple times. It doesn't work.

The problems with your solutions is that you draw from your experiences and personality.

It's not even a race issue. Just mentioning it because that would have been the dumbest interpretation of the above sentence.

You're just really bad at relating to other people's circumstances and mindset. It's not slight that you haven't been spending a whole lot of time with street criminals, but if you had, you would know why your solutions don't do anything to prevent crime.

The current generation that's doing most of the killings in the US already know they will die in the streets or be locked up for life. They don't even expect to live to 30 even when they are sober. When they were 12 they already knew dozens of relatives or their friends relatives that were killed or locked up. That realization isn't new to them.

My solutions would indeed bring crime way down, and indeed a form of these were implemented in the 1990s, and we saw a stretch of about 23 years where crime steadily fell. It's been on the way back up ever since the Ferguson shooting, and the attitude toward police and policing changed.

Even if you don't believe that these solutions would deter crime, it would prevent it simply by keeping the criminals off the streets for longers. A high percentage of major violent crime is committed by those with an existing violent criminal history. The current approach by the left is to keep cycling these people back on the street quickly, and repeatedly doing so until they do something really really awful.

Reducing the general presence of a violent criminal element also reduces violent crime from marginal types -- the ones who aren't necessarily terrible people, but are subject to being highly influenced by their surrounding environment. It's not too different than observing how two class troublemakers can cause other kids in the class to behave worse, or how two a few bad employees can spark bad behavior by other employees. Many people subconsciously adapt to the norms around them.

In any case, the solution to gun violence is to focus upon the people using the guns for illegal purposes, not the guns themselves. The left doesn't want to do that, because it will lead them to incarcerating more people of color.

Fairly sure we would need some sort of research on the subject to say what works.

[gimmick]

But anyways, if we look at the claims in the OP.

This isn't a recent thing.

This doesn't use significant amount of resources.

This doesn't take anything away from Covid related research.

And i believe that's all there was.

Oh and this was assigned to CDC because they started this thing almost 30 years ago.

Head of the CDC is a political appointee. It's usually better that they don't touch the day to day operations at all. Permanent 4 to 8 year press tour is about the best CDC can hope for.