Lather, I would agree that labelling gun ownership a Health Crisis is a bit much -- if true.
But that wasn't my point. The CDC (about which I know very little) is a government agency, and as such will continue to exist and perhaps even prosper whatever action, if any, is taken with regard to gun ownership. Hence the comparison between the CDC and the Tobacco Institute, which has a material interest in the actions taken with regard to the tobacco industry, is an apples & oranges type of comparison. That's all.
And on another point: the CDC's objectivity. True, the CDC has adopted a position of advocacy. Does that mean, in your opinion, that it is providing us with doctored statistics? In other words, do you have any reason to believe that their statistics are inaccurate, and can you prove it? And, final question: could they not have reached the conclusion that guns should be banned on the basis of the statistics they collected, rather than the other way around?
Joan
P.S. Sorry I could not take you up on your breakfast offer. I had a houseful -- oops, I mean treeful -- of exhausted satyrs to take care of. |
