Sigh…
They finally did it. The Biden Administration has declared gun violence a public health crisis. The question many of us in the gun community are asking, why now, when the Biden administration has been touting (and taking credit for) the declining rates of violent crime across the country?
U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy labeled gun violence as a public health crisis and called it “the leading cause of death among children and teenagers”. This declaration is a blatant overreach and a direct threat to the Second Amendment. As a staunch defender of the right to bear arms, this advisory is deeply troubling for several reasons.
Full article, HERE from Bearing Arms.
This has been an ongoing battle for literally years, with the dems, medical community, et al pushing their anti-gun agenda any way they could.
After yesterday’s announcement by SCOTUS that effectively .gov CAN censor media at their whim, I think this could bode ill for the Second Amendment in the long term.
Once again, they did not let the truth get in the way of their lies, especially the death rates. I ‘love’ how their definition of ‘children’ keeps changing, from 0-17 to now with this one, 0-19, so they can bring in the gangbanger deaths to get the ‘numbers’ where they want it.
I pulled this graphic from HERE.
Of note, there is only one ethnicity where the firearm death rate actually exceeds the automotive death rate.
I get so tired of this, and am reminded of the old saws, ‘The truth can’t even get its pants on before the lies have been around the world twice…
And figures lie and liars figure…
Sigh…
Hey Old NFO;
You noticed that…They don’t mention that most of the gun crimes are in “deep blue cities” and it is mostly “their constituents” that cause most of the gun violence to each other, and now you throw in all the illegals that crossed the border and they will be fighting the local gangs for “turf” and the crime rate will go up as they fight it out. and of course the lawful gun owner will be blamed…”can’t go blaming a core donk constituency now can we.gotta blame an inanimate object, because we can’t hold people responsible for their action now can we.”
“After yesterday’s announcement by SCOTUS that effectively .gov CAN censor media at their whim”
That’s not really what they said. This case was completely determined on standing. I generally don’t like how standing is used in our judicial system but there are reasons. You have to be involved in the case, or have been harmed by the law, in order to bring suit. It is supposed to prevent constant and ongoing lawsuits by people whose self appointed job is to bring lawsuits. Unfortunately the left finds judges who grant standing at the drop of a hat and are generally willing to drop the hat themselves. This is most likely a relatively correct application of the rule but I also tend to think that Constitutional issues should not require standing to be addressed.
So 3 conservatives wanted to ignore standing and resolve the underlying issue; 3 other conservatives correctly implemented the standing issue and will wait to resolve the underlying issue; and 3 progressive judges took the opportunity to delay the case, presumably hoping that the ideology of the Court will shift before another case makes its way through. I agree with the first three, the last three will vote against the 2nd Amendment no matter what. Hopefully there are already better lawyers than these who are already putting together a better case and we’ll see that new case in the very next term.
Gah! And then I got so caught up in my explanation that I said “2nd Amendment” even though this wasn’t a 2nd Amendment case. Hopefully you all knew what I meant. 😳
They are going for all the marbles, at ANY cost. They will not stop until they ARE stopped. There will be no rule of law.
Seen elsewhere–We are the last generation that remembers what life was like without cell phones or social media.
The Biden* Regime are the domestic enemy of the United States.
Get back to us when medically caused deaths are gone.
Health crises? I agree. We start by prosecuting criminals, alphabet government employees not qualified to have a firearm, and give all the healthy citizens a firearm to decrease the the threat to health.
Disarming the FBI and ATF would certainly make the nation safer for American citizens and their canine friends.
I’m familiar with the data.
Domestically, the higher rates of violent crime are in Democrat-controlled jurisdictions…. Which also happen to be the jurisdictions with the most restrictive gun-laws.
So it’s that argument for “more of what doesn’t work”.
International comparisons should bear in mind that almost every country with a higher violent crime and homicide rate than the US, has the kind of legslstion that is proposed as the “cure” for American violence. Why should America adoptbthe laws that have failed so obviously in , say, Mexico?
As for cherry-picked comparisons with nations like England and Australia. Bith of those nations had relatively low homicide rates BEFORE restrictive legislation was introduced, and neither of those nations experienced a reduction in homicide AS A RESULT of that legislation.
Plus….. I observe that those who focus on “gun-crime” are effectively arguing that those who are stabbed or bludgeoned to death matter less. I don’t know why this should be. They are not less dead, and it is no comfort to their families that they were killed with one method and not another.
I would be insisting tgat those who wish tontalk about violent crime, talk about ALL of it.
All-Thanks, and I stand corrected Hereso!
I saw that risible opinion. Fortunately, it’s been eclipsed by Biden’s beyond epic trainwreck last night.
All go, eh?
But the Various Flavors of Marxism are what, an unsightly bit of rash?