What do we have here? A CDC Director, starting to get political about gun control.
For some context:
We are in the midst of the dealiest pandemic in more than 100 years; smack dab in the middle of the second strain of a mutating virus, that has affected not just rural areas in China or urban centers in India. It’s affecting us right here at home – the United States, where in Atlanta of all places, the CDC, originally called the Communicable Disease Center was formed in 1947.
Wait a minute – while an actual disease ravages the health of Americans – the CDC Director is choosing NOW, as a time to push a gun control agenda? We can’t even get people to a point where they are not in danger from actual diseases, and the CDC wants to go into uncharted territory?
This is a shameful push from a once respected institution. When did “gun violence” get classified as a communicable disease? Sounds like that could be one EXTREMELY liberal take on viral gang violence growth, but gun violence – a communicable disease?
The problem is: it’s not within the purview of the CDC to worry about gun violence.
Does any of this seem even slightly suspect, at all?
Front Page news on CNN. A government agency that has nothing to do with firearms, whose director has been shown to have historical biases to the far left, all of a sudden sharing an opinion on gun issues.
Not talking about actual viruses. Not trying to find ways to better address the debacle we call Covid. Not talking about legitimate concerns in the scientific community regarding communicable diseases. Talking about why gun control makes sense.
You cannot make this stuff up.
Bear in mind, the charter behind the CDC doesn’t allude to public health crises. It focuses on communicable diseases. It was started to combat the spread of Malaria and Typhus.
Furthermore, who has classified gun violence as an epidemic? Who has given permission to the CDC to waste money on tracking gunshot wound volumes in ER’s across the country. Certainly not the American people. Oh, by the way, that’s a program that costs more than 2.2 million a year in taxpayer money. Gunshots, in the most joking sense, aren’t even a “communicable disease”. But who wants to joke about gun violence – that’s disgusting.
Gun violence is a problem, surely. But suicide and gang violence are much bigger problems, even if you don’t count the percentage of deaths resulting from a bullet fired out of a gun.
Where is the CDC on Gang Violence these days? Surely that is an epidemic if gun violence is – the numbers of which come mostly from gang or suicide related concerns?
(The answer is, other than doing basic research and data compilation a high school student could manage, they have a page about “Youth Violence”; mostly about bullying. The last commissioned study on the topic with any teeth happened in 2014).
So do I believe that gun violence, which is a sub segment of gang violence in most regards, is a bigger problem than gang violence or domestic violence? I do not. BUt Domesitc violence is ugly. No one wants to talk about it. Gang violence isn’t “woke enough” a topic to be discussed. After all, no other possible reason could exist for gang violence than systemic racism, no doubt.
I’m also willing to bet that conveniently, the data that the CDC will find will point towards semi-automatic rifles with black plastic stocks as being more dangerous, and a bigger public health risk than handguns. Forget crime statistics, they have anyways regarding the sources of gun violence.
The problem with all of this isn’t just that the CDC has no purview here. If it were so important, why isn’t the ATF doing this type of research work, or making opinions on solutions for gun violence? Oh wait, that’s not within their purview either. Maybe Mr. Biden needs to make a new bureaucratic agency that can make “informed, scientifically-backed, completely not biased, and not politically motivated” suggestions on how to combat gun violence. They are trying to do this now in a “grassroots” effort to push an agenda that seems more community based.
Forget about enforcing the rules about guns already on the books. Forget about blaming criminals for criminal acts. Let’s blame the guns. Blame the law abiding citizens. Blame law enforcement, even. This couldn’t possibly stem from criminal misuse of firearms. Suicides don’t have anything to do with the need for systemic mental health improvements – no, it’s the gun that does the killing, not the brain behind the finger, behind the gun. Horrible as it is – and suicide is a horrible thing – suicides make up a shockingly large portion of “gun violence” incidents.
Is mental health an appropriate topic for the CDC Director to talk about? Maybe not, as it doesn’t seem to be a communicable disease, but it is a hell of a lot more appropriate to talk about that as an epidemic than gun violence. Where are all the articles on front page CNN about mental health commentary by Government agency heads. It’s suspicious at best. Unveiled propaganda at worst (but that’s not really the worst – it could get even worse).
It’s estimated that some number less than 16,000 people per year die by gun-involved suicide, though the numbers leave a lot to be desired with regards to accuracy.
More than 250,000 people die in preventable medical accidents and malpractice scenarios each year. Many of those deaths are helped by not having a very good control over communicable diseases and their spread. A perfectly legitimate use of CDC funding to improve their constituent’s life expectancy and public health. No outcry from the CDC. Certainly not during a pandemic. They’ve got better things to do.
More than 36,000 die from driving fatalities and fully more than 10,000 are drunk driving related fatalities per year in the USA. No outcry from the CDC. Certainly not during a pandemic.
More than 93,000 people died from drug overdoses related to opioids last year. The CDC tracks this number of course. But when it comes to the most pressing matter from the CDC Director, there is no mention of an opioid crisis.
Stunningly out of their element, the CDC Director and those involved with PR and outreach should not be publicizing opinion about gun violence, if they aren’t at least willing to give an opinion on any number of other “epidemics” with equal fervor. Or any fervor for that matter.
Let’s not forget, in the tragic Sandy Hook incident, where innocent lives were lost, Dr. Rochelle Walensky was touched by gun violence. Her colleague’s cousin’s son was tragically killed that day. A horrible incident no doubt.
Why CNN needs to publicize this part of the article, I don’t know. But when your colleague’s cousin’s son dies tragically, as long as you can use it to further your closely held political beliefs to accomplish a broader agenda, then it should not go to waste.
Why can’t CNN, Dr. Walensky and others who would publicize this event celebrate the life of a child taken too early. Condemn the criminal who performed the act. Urge the improvement of mental health aids.
Instead,it is used to politically and emotionally charge a public article about gun violence. Lest we forget that the shooter on that day suffered from severe mental health issues. Forget about that – Guns are the problem. They always are. Even for an agency that has a charter to focus on communicable diseases, not even public health per se. Not that gun violence is a public health issue more than a criminality issue. Guns are the problem, even for a doctor who is an expert in infectious diseases.
A final note: Walensky says “It’s not about gun control.” but she also says “it’s pedal to the metal time (re: gun violence initiatives). She also approved a budget of more than 10 million taxpayer dollars to “study gun violence” to “uncover solutions”. A full third of the article is about the NRA, and a token doctor who owns guns but is for “practical gun laws”. Seems legit.