NIH back to funding gun control studies

Finally I'll be able to sleep at night once this question has been answered. We couldn't have just stopped at the "Runs with scissors" study?

The last study I saw from them was about the high likelihood of getting shot in a gunfight if you had a gun.

So, I'm thinking, mutual combat. Everytime they both get shot, the numbers double. No controls for gang on gang shootings where five or more have guns in a gunfight and many get shot.

How often is there a gunfight between two people and NO ONE gets shot?

Not answered in the study.

Wow do they have enough and/or statments in there. I bet they also have a "differential risk" of getting a traffic ticket, or getting cavities, or smoking, or or or ......

Own a gun, your health care premiums will be double ...

How can any study regarding teenagers be credible if it doesn't include teen pregnancy rates?

I was thinking the same thing: what next? Studies to see if supplying alcohol to teenagers increases sexual activity?

How about another study ... does the death rate amongst teenagers increase when you give them whiskey and car keys?

Every factor is and/or, thus the study might show only: "whether adolescents who consume alcohol ... face a differential risk of being ... injured in a non-gun assault."

I can tell you the answer to that question ...

This study reminds me of a Federally sponsored study on child injuries involving tricycles I read when I was in college in the 70s. After spending hundreds of thousands of dollars the study concluded that the design was inherently unstable and recommended the addition of a fourth wheel. If they had taken the time to ask any one with common sense they could have come up with that answer without spending a dime. Episodes such as that study make me think academics have had the common sense they were born with educated out of them.

"I was thinking the same thing: what next? Studies to see if supplying alcohol to teenagers increases sexual activity?"

This study was done, and the conclusion (IIRC) was basically that while there is some increase in sexual activity (about 5% if memory serves) when alcohol is introduced, generally teenagers just need to be left somewhere more or less private.

That is some ballsy phrasing right there! "...consume alcohol and/or carry firearms, and/or whose daily activities occur in surroundings rich in alcohol and/or firearms..." In other words, even if they find guns have a "non-differential risk," but alcohol has a "differential risk," they're set to lump the two together in their report and recommend restrictions on firearms. Invidious... but I have to admire their cojones.

So it worries me when Obama will start his anti-gun stuff again?

He must have not ben around for 1994 or maybe he really just wants to destroy the Democratic Party.