Failure To Orient Horse And Cart

Writing in Politico Dr. Mark L. Rosenberg, who "is president emeritus of the Task Force for Global Health in Decatur, and was the founding director of CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control" tells us where the gun debate has gone awry:

What’s Missing From the Gun Debate

It’s simple: Science.

He goes on to deplore the lack of funding for basic research into effective means of reducing gun violence but of course, the lack of funding is a symptom rather than a cause. What is missing from the debate is not science, it is trust. 

Conservatives believe, on some evidence, that the social sciences have become yet another bastion for academic progressives. Consequently right-wingers believe that agenda-driven progressives will engage in agenda-driven statistical jiggery-pokery, produce papers peer-reviewed by other progressives, and come away "proving" the efficacy of the progressive agenda item du jour.

Is that distrust misplaced? Maybe! NY Times columnist and reliable lefty Nick Kristof seems to have figured out that the "assault weapons ban" is a joke. And Leah Libresco surprised herself and (I suspect) her WaPo and/or 538 editors with a piece titled 

I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.

So maybe there are progressives willing to break with their team on some gun-related issues. On the other hand, Mike Bloomberg's "Everytown" isn't even aiming for credibility [CNBC list] with their "Schools Shootings" count and don't get me started on the NY Times editors (OK, one).

Closer to home, author Dr. Rosenberg engages in a bit of, hmm, card-palming himself. Stay with me through some snippets, and I bet you'll guess where I am going:

Where does that leave us? The exact causes of America’s rise in mass shootings—and the best ways to prevent such violence—remain uncertain all these years after Columbine. Should we focus our efforts on mental health? Would a ban on semi-automatic rifles necessarily solve the problem? What if the surest bet is for schools to install metal detectors in their halls? 

...

Common sense doesn’t tell us whether a ban on semi-automatic rifles will reduce mass shootings—that question is too complicated for us to simply work out in our heads. But it’s possible a well-designed study could, and would in turn build public trust in any resulting legislation.

...

And we don’t know whether banning the sale of semi-automatic rifles will prevent mass shootings or lead to more gun deaths because there will be fewer good guys with a gun to stop the bad guys with guns. To answer the question, we also have to measure the degree to which each intervention infringes on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Only rigorous, objective and well-designed scientific research can find the answer.

...

When we ask lawmakers to make decisions without data—measures like campus carry, universal background checks, identifying individuals at high risk for violence or bans on semi-automatic rifles—we are pushing them to approve the equivalent of thalidomide for gun violence.

Four mentions of semi-automatic rifles. Mentions of "assault weapons"?  Zero. And why is that?

I don't know but... Dr. Rosenberg  is a smart guy who has surely figured out that an AR-15 or other semi-automatic platform tricked out with a black matte finish, bayonet mount, grenade launcher mount and flash suppressor to look like a prop in a Schwarzenegger film is no more deadly than a semi-automatic with a wooden stock that would be OK-ish (except for the magazine) in a John Wayne film.

 

But the national debate, as Dr. Rosenberg well knows, is not about banning semi-automatic rifles. As long as they don't look scary, progressives seem to be OK with semi-automatics rifles, for now anyway. So why is the doctor eliding the difference? Why won't he put his cards on the table and tell us that an assault weapons ban is a joke and would be about as effective as addressing our nation's alcohol problem by banning Scotch and vodka but not bourbon or gin?

 

I don't know and I would be curious to hear his explanation. But one guess many will make is that he is simply not comfortable delivering hard truths to progressives. Which kind of disqualifies him from leading the charge of "science".

 

DO LET ME ADD: Here is another credibility-crushing example fro the good doctor (my emphasis):

 

We need to find interventions that will both stop the violence and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners. For instance, right now we don’t know whether arming all teachers in a school will save lives or take more lives.

 

Well, we do know that no serious proposal to arm "all" teachers has been made. Why send a strawman into the crossfire?

 

 

Comments

[Old Lurker]

Davod "While the Obama media campaign was that Obamacare was not a tax. The DOJ lawyers argued before SCOTUS that it was"

Future generations of law students are gonna be laughing their socks off about that one.

[Davod]

Paul Boise at the Daily Caller in "'Black Panther' Review: This Deeply Conservative Movie Makes Captain America Look Like A Neo-Marxist Stooge" includes 10 reasons for his comment.

"Black Panther" stresses the importance of fatherhood.

"Black Panther" highlights the pain of lost heritage.

"Black Panther" emphasizes the need for strong families.

"Black Panther" pays tribute to the power of tradition.

"Black Panther" denigrates the destructiveness of ethnocentrism.

"Black Panther" endorses Plato's concept of the philosopher king.

"Black Panther" favors national sovereignty over one-world governments.

"Black Panther" celebrates masculinity.

"Black Panther" sticks it to Marxist revolutionary psychopaths.

"Black Panther" has a unifying message: "we are one tribe."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/27274/black-panther-review-deeply-conservative-movie-paul-bois

[DebinGA]

new thread

[Old Lurker]

Henry "For those waiting for Elmer's alarm to go off, remember who pays for all the lawyers of these govt shitheads: same as WI, we do."

And then just today Manafort has complained to the court that Mueller is attempting to "drain his resources" so he has to plead guilty. He says soon he will have to default on his mortgages.

Femall.

[henry]

OL: or Dr J. Manafort can eat beans as far as I care.

[Janet 🚬 - I wish my family had a poncho]

from henry's 9:34 - "Van Der Zwaan deleted and failed to produce emails sought by the special counsel and a law firm, prosecutors said."

He should have changed his name to Hillary Clinton or Lois Lerner.

[joan]

JamesD: Your post about Chief Justice Roberts is perfect. As I read it, I thought JamesD is so intelligent and eloquent and expresses himself cogently and perceptively. Your writing is outstanding.

(The rest of you aren't slouches, either. :) )

[joan]

Dave,

I am so sorry to hear about your dad.

[Texas Liberty Gal]

Dave - Hated hearing that your dad passed on. My sincerest condolences!

[Pagar]

Dave, sorry to hear about your Dad.