Thread: NRA 'inhibiting' political agenda, not 'medical research'

NRA 'inhibiting' political agenda, not 'medical research'

JANUARY 8, 2013

BY: DAVID CODREA

Obama fixes his eyes on CDC Director Thomas Frieden at Rose Garden presser: Any questions as to who is giving the marching orders on "findings," or the political control and will behind it all?
Credits: Win McNamee/Getty Images

Among proposals "designed to reduce gun violence," President Barack Obama "should be striking a little-known section of his signature health care law that inhibits medical research on the subject," The Virginia-Pilot urged yesterday.

"The addition, titled 'Protection of Second Amendment Gun Rights,' was dropped into the Obamacare bill in the final days of congressional deliberations in 2010 at the behest of - who else? - the National Rifle Association," the editorial finger-points. "As The Washington Post recently reported, the short provision - barring the collection of information about gun or ammunition ownership under 'wellness and prevention' portions of the law - has drawn renewed attention following the massacre of children and educators at a Connecticut elementary school."
"Over the years, the NRA has methodically and successfully fought to cut or eliminate funding for gun-related research by the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health and others," the editorial explains.

It certainly sounds like "reasonable" and "commonsense" measures are being opposed by "NRA-endorsed ignorance." At least to anyone who doesn't know better.

Fortunately, we do.

NRA's opposition was not to "medical research," but to a focused program using tax dollars that had a specific agenda to subvert gun ownership under the fraudulent imprimatur of scientific authority, and one that was actually telegraphed by those perpetrating the bait-and-switch in their confidence and arrogance.

"We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes," Dr, Mark Rosenberg, then-Director of the CDC's National Center for Injury Control and Prevention told The Washington Post ( ! ) back in 1994. "Now it [sic] is dirty, deadly, and banned."

We've reexamined in recent days how "public information" regarding gun owner registration lists is abused by media cheerleaders enthusiastically exploiting it, and while the Pilot propaganda piece dismisses that by claiming "those fears could have been easily addressed through privacy protections," at that point, the battle would have moved to making lists available, as opposed to creating them in the first place (and noting that those who are most high-risk are exempt from being included by law).

We've seen how health-related lists without due process can create a "blanket dragnet" for gun rights disabilities. And earlier ridiculing dismissals of "slippery slope paranoia" from the gun ban camp notwithstanding, we see those once more confident and arrogant taking dispensing with the pretenses and giving a glimpse of their end game.

And we've seen how media outlets stumping for "gun control" carry the administration's water and it's talking points, again, and again and again, In a further overt display of confidence and arrogance, the "Authorized Journalists" aren't even hiding the fact that Nancy Pelosi is feeding them the terms they will be coordinating on to create the sanctioned meme. All pretenses of impartiality, lack of bias, journalistic integrity, being a "free press" and guarding the public interest as"government watchdogs" have been cast aside as the Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists proudly adopt the mantle of Official Propaganda Corps (just don't ask Obama topronounce it), or more appropriately, Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda.

"Today, America’s specialty is consumption," economist and author Jerry Robinson writes in a column on WND.com, and that makes a point this columnist has been stressing for years, with often-times disappointing results. Gun Rights Examiner readers have been asked time and again not to be mere consumers of information, but to be force multipliers, to use what resonates and makes sense to them presented here and on other liberty-oriented sites to give those getting their information from establishment media what commentator and broadcast legend Paul Harvey called "the rest of the story."

What the Virginia-Pilot did was manipulate its readers using nor only "official" talking points, but they committed an intentional "sin of omission" by not delving into why NRA helped put the kibosh on anti-gun activism disguised as medical research on the taxpayers' dime, information that is well-known in gun rights circles, or at least that should be if gun owners are paying attention. Yet, at this writing, not one comment poster has enlightened the readership there as to why NRA took the stance they did, meaning those who don't know any better won't get the truth and will form their opinions and choose their side based on a lie that can be almost effortlessly exposed.

That's just one example, and in the scheme of things, a minor one at that (discounting the fact thatmany other outlets with wide readerships are busily spreading the same unchallengedtalking points that omit the same information).

But it illustrates a wider and more insidious phenomenon that most gun owners -- the ones who account for record attendance at gun shows but can't seem to find a few bucks or a few minutes to protect their rights -- seem perfectly content to let others carry the load.

There's no more time to sit on the sidelines. If the feeding frenzy of recent weeks hasn't convinced us of that, nothing will short of stepped-up real-world oppression. Gun owners need to be engaged, now, like never before, lest the cold civil war now being waged against them turns hot, requiring either actual terrible sacrifices or surrender. Why anyone would need to be urged, prodded, cajoled, scolded and ranted at to do something, anything, at this point is one of the regrets that perhaps will surface amidst other mixed terrors as doors get kicked in, but the fact is, anyone not trying to prevent that by regularly writing their representatives now, doing what they can to correct media lies now, and joining with others in organized activism now, is letting others bear a burden that is too heavy for a few to sustain, yet would be light if reinforcements joined in.

Apathy is as great a threat as enmity. Possibly greater.

Any bets on whether or not anyone reading this will take it on themselves to give Virginia-Pilot readers (and others at "news" sites spreading the exact same talking points) a clue as to why the CDC got their funding cut, and who they're getting their marching orders from now?

NRA 'inhibiting' political agenda, not 'medical research' - National gun rights | Examiner.com
------------

From the Virginia Pilot: Authorized Obama Media it seems,,

National Rifle Association vetoes health research

Posted to: Editorials Opinion
ABOUT EDITORIALS
Virginian-Pilot editorials represent the consensus of the editorial board, which is independent of the newsroom. Board members are David Mele, publisher; Donald Luzzatto, editorial page editor; and Candy Hatcher, Daryl Lease, Shawn Day andMichelle Washington, editorial writers.PILOT OPINION ON TWITTER

Follow us on Twitter to join the discussion. | What's Twitter?

THE ISSUE
The gun-rights groups successfully forbids medical professionals from gathering data on violence.WHERE WE STAND

Lawmakers once again cede critical decisions to the organization’s powerful lobbyists.

The Virginian-Pilot

© January 7, 2013President Barack Obama says his administration will soon produce proposals designed to reduce gun violence. Among his first steps should be striking a little-known section of his signature health care law that inhibits medical research on the subject.

The addition, titled "Protection of Second Amendment Gun Rights," was dropped into the Obamacare bill in the final days of congressional deliberations in 2010 at the behest of - who else? - the National Rifle Association.

As The Washington Post recently reported, the short provision - barring the collection of information about gun or ammunition ownership under "wellness and prevention" portions of the law - has drawn renewed attention following the massacre of children and educators at a Connecticut elementary school.
Although some White House officials and lawmakers say they were unaware of the provision until recently, other leaders - Democrats and Republicans - clearly knew about it.

According to The Post, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, an NRA ally, added the language. Others, including Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota, objected to the provision when they spotted it but said they let it remain in the interest of getting Obamacare passed.

Proponents of the provisions cited numerous reasons for adding it, including blocking the government from ever using doctors to create a surreptitious database of gun owners. Others claimed that gathering information about weapons could lead to increases in insurance premiums.

But those fears could have been easily addressed through privacy protections. What the provision actually did - and what the NRA knew it would do - is stifle medical research into gun violence.

Over the years, the NRA has methodically and successfully fought to cut or eliminate funding for gun-related research by the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health and others.

In Florida, the drive to block research led to a bill that would have imposed jail sentences on doctors who asked about guns in homes - even if the purpose was to remind parents to keep them safely stored away from children.

A revised version, signed by the governor, urged doctors to "refrain" from asking about guns. The law has been ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge, but the state is appealing, according to The Post.

Gun violence is undeniably a public health issue, with the costs of shootings affecting hospitals, emergency services and more.

Researching the causes - and potential solutions - is every bit as logical as past scientific research into automobile safety, tobacco use and other behavior that causes large-scale injury or illness.

The medical profession should be freed to study gun violence and examine ways that could truly balance the interests of public health and Second Amendment rights.

The alternative for all of us is to dwell - and some to die - in NRA-endorsed ignorance.

National Rifle Association vetoes health research | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Video: Secret gun-rights provision in ObamaCare?

JANUARY 9, 2013
BY ED MORRISSEY

By golly, Nancy Pelosi was right — they didn’t know what was in ObamaCare until it passed! Of course, in this case all she needed to do was ask her buddy Harry Reid, who apparently sandbagged his party’s gun-control wing by inserting an interesting clause in the 2800-page bill that no one in Congress bothered to read before voting on it. CNN’s Jim Acosta reveals the restriction on firearms-registration data collection built into the 2010 law:

WATCH VIDEO AT LINK:

The reason Reid inserted this clause, CNN reports without ever having actually talked to Reid (he declined comment), was to make the NRA “benign” in the ObamaCare fight — and to push back against “conspiracy theorists” who claimed that the bill would allow Barack Obama to start grabbing guns. Hey, that would never happen, right? Sure.

In any case, this isn’t that much of a bar on Congressional action. What can be done in this manner can be undone in the same manner. I’d keep an eye on any thousand-page bill rushed to the floor in this session to see if Reid reverses course.

Video: Secret gun-rights provision in ObamaCare? « Hot Air