Opinion Log inEmailPassword Remember meYour login is case sensitive
I have forgotten my password
Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens logincloseMy New ScientistHomeNewsIn-Depth ArticlesBlogsOpinionTVGalleriesTopic GuidesLast WordSubscribeDatingLook for Science JobsSPACETECHENVIRONMENTHEALTHLIFEPHYSICS&MATHSCIENCE IN SOCIETYCookies & PrivacyHome|Opinion|Science in Society|Opinion
A shot at the truth about gun violence23 January 2013Magazine issue 2901. Subscribe and saveFor similar stories, visit theWeapons Technologyand US national issuesTopic GuidesThe best ways to prevent gun-related crime have never been properly investigated. It is time for the scientific evidence to trump ideology
LOVE it or loathe it, there is no denying that the US National Rifle Association (NRA) has been stunningly successful in its efforts to fight gun control. In the 1990s, it even managed to largely shut down US government research into gun violence as a public-health problem - an unbelievable situation that still stands today. This is why President Obama's clear instruction to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to initiate research into reducing gun violence is important and necessary (see "Obama to scientists: Tell us how to calm gun violence"). But it is only the first step. Deciding whether to fund the research will be down to Congress, where the NRA's influence still holds strong. If the NRA succeeds in blocking this attempt to bring science to bear on America's gun problem, it will be another demoralising example of the power of money over evidence-based politics. The NRA presents itself as a civil rights group dedicated to upholding and defending the Second Amendment to the US Constitution - the one about the right to "keep and bear arms". The gun lobby interprets this as an inalienable individual right to own guns. Although the NRA was founded on this platform, it is important to recognise that it has strong links to the firearms industry, which supplies it with millions of dollars in funding. Viewed from this perspective, the NRA's strangling of research is utterly reprehensible. Imagine if a group associated with food manufacturers were able to curtail research on obesity, or if tobacco interests had nixed the science that tied smoking to lung cancer. Hopefully we will now get some fresh answers on the best approaches to preventing gun violence. But if this knowledge is to be acted on, politicians and the public on both sides will need to abandon entrenched positions. Liberal opponents of the gun lobby often assume that the answer lies in tougher restrictions on ownership - but that isn't necessarily where the biggest gains could be made. Advocates for gun rights must accept that public-health researchers aren't the stooges of a sinister bureaucracy intent on seizing their guns. They are professionals trying to use the scientific method to save lives. They should be set free to do this work, and then listened to.
New ScientistNot just a website!Subscribe to New Scientist and get:New Scientist magazine delivered every weekUnlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issuesSubscribe Now and Save
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.Have your sayOnly subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.
email:password:Remember meOnly personal subscribers may leave comments on this article
Subscribe now to comment.
InterpretationThu Jan 24 11:49:41 GMT 2013 by Eric Kvaalen"...the Second Amendment to the US Constitution - the one about the right to 'keep and bear arms'. The gun lobby interprets this as an inalienable individual right to own guns."
That's also the interpretation of the Supreme Court (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller ). The amendment states, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
I don't think it's right to view the NRA as the arm of the gun manufacture industry. The NRA has a huge amount of popular support in the country.
If people have the inalienable right to keep and bear guns, then everyone in the country should be issued with a gun free - otherwise people who can't afford guns are deprived of that right - unless they go stealing guns.
Guns (or the second amendment) thus incentivize crime - the stealing of guns - and to further use for the purposes of crime. That''s the reality.
There is nothing ideological about the gun business or the 'rights' that say it should exist.
That's not what I've been reading in the news sites. There is huge popular support even among NRA members for mandatory background checks and limitation of clip sizes.
(long URL - click here)
The 2nd amendment was written when the apex of military technology was the muzzle loading musket. I think even the most "liberal" anti-gun fanatic would be ok with everyone in the country of any age or mental condition being supplied with a single shot muzzle loading musket.
There is also the bit about "well regulated militia". Since when is every tom dick and Charlie Manson who wants a machine gun a member of a "well regulated militia"?
LaPierre kinda shot himself in the foot with his incredibly stupid suggestion that arming teachers with automatic weapons was a viable solution to the problem. Right, a school full of hormone addled adolescent students and automatic weapons. What could possibly go wrong?
It is time for the scientific evidence to trump ideology>>
what an excuse for a dictatorship
it certainly worked for the russians ,who described their econmy as driven. by science.
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.
ADVERTISEMENTMoreLatest newsThe hidden costs of austerity10:00 11 April 2013In making deep budget cuts, politicians are experimenting with the health of nations, not just their wealth
Txtspk is a stimulating force in language evolution08:00 11 April 2013Far from leading to the demise of the English language, digital technologies have enabled a massive increase in writing. Long may it continue
Margaret Thatcher's legacy in British science18:00 10 April 2013The late prime minister Margaret Thatcher raised the alarm about global warming – but British science funding has never recovered from her governments' cuts
OMG – it's the textual revolution for language
16:00 10 April 2013Digital technology is fuelling a linguistic revolution in which even simple expressions like LOL mask sophisticated layers of meaning, argues Tom Chatfield
see all related stories
MoreLatest newsCould an airliner be hacked by a smartphone? 20:14 12 April 2013A commercial pilot with computer security expertise claims he has worked out a way of hacking into an airliner's flight deck
Google lets you bequeath digital assets when you die19:20 12 April 2013The new Inactive Account Manager feature is designed to take care of all of your Google assets - whether emails on Gmail or YouTube videos - when you die
New Japanese method for killing dolphins is inhumane
18:03 12 April 2013Fishermen in Japan have adopted a new way of dispatching dolphins in drive hunts but the method is no more humane than previous techniques
Today on New Scientist: 12 April 201317:26 12 April 2013All the latest stories on newscientist.com: the map of the Internet, our closest non-human ancestor, and more
see all latest news
Most readMost commented Twist in dark matter tale hints at shadow Milky Way New Japanese method for killing dolphins is inhumane Astrophile: A handy guide to planetary parking spots Map of the internet could make it stronger Drone-wrecking laser gun to sail on US warship
Most readMost commented Alien megaprojects: The hunt has begun Drone-wrecking laser gun to sail on US warship The hidden costs of austerity Wind power delivers too much to ignore Feedback: Conspiranoid swapshop TWITTERNew Scientist is on Twitter
Get the latest from New Scientist: sign up to our Twitter feed
LATEST JOBS St. Jude Children's Research Hospital: Preclinical Research Technician Paramount Recruitment: Software Developer - Scientific - Perl Paramount Recruitment: Senior Account Director - Healthcare Advertising Paramount Recruitment: Senior Account Manager - Healthcare Advertising Flame Pharma: Medical Affairs - Clinical Research Physicians Jobs In Manchester This week's issueSubscribe
For exclusive news and expert analysis, subscribe to New Scientist.
Gain full online accessCurrent issue contentContent of past issues13 April 2013ADVERTISEMENTBack to topLoginEmailPassword Remember meYour login is case sensitive
I have forgotten my password
Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens logincloseAbout usNew ScientistSyndicationRecruitment AdvertisingStaff at New ScientistAdvertiseRBI JobsUser HelpContact UsFAQ / HelpDisclaimerTs & CsCookiesPrivacy PolicySubscriptionsSubscribeRenewGift subscriptionMy accountBack issuesCustomer ServiceLinksSite MapBrowse all articlesMagazine archiveNewScientistJobsThe Last WordRSS FeedsOnline StoreAndroid AppMobile site homeScience JobsBiology JobsChemistry JobsClinical JobsSales JobsEarth & Environment JobsEngineering JobsMaths & IT JobsGraduate Jobs© Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
No comments:
Post a Comment