Royal Purple

Congressional ban on gun control

Back to Article
Back to Article

Congressional ban on gun control

Garrett Kluever, Biz & Tech Editor

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Gun violence is often touted as an argument of haves and have-nots, but we should have this conversation from the premise of research.

In 1996, Congress passed the Dickey Amendment as part of the omnibus spending bill, which stated, “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”

The amendment was introduced by Arkansas’ then-representative Jay Dickey, after whom the measure is named. The National Rifle Association (NRA) lobbied and pushed for the amendment.

Although the amendment did not state the CDC couldn’t study gun violence, approximately $2.6 million was immediately cut from the CDC’s budget, which is the amount used previously for gun injury research.

Point taken, Congress.

For almost two decades, this mandate has chilled the CDC towards any progress in studying gun violence. Although numerous attempts have been made to repeal the amendment or push for research on gun violence in America, the CDC has remained still.

This leads us to this year and the recent $1.3 trillion spending agreement that was hastily passed through Congress in late March.

The agreement has a single line, which “clarified” the Dickey Amendment, in response to the recent onslaught of mass shootings.

The line reads: “While appropriations language prohibits the CDC and other agencies from using appropriated funding to advocate or promote gun control, the Secretary of Health and Human Services has stated the CDC has the authority to conduct research on the causes of gun violence.”

Florida Representative Democrat Stephanie Murphy, who introduced the language, tweeted, “It’s a victory for our country & children. Our work to stop gun violence will continue.

Except, it’s not.

The CDC already knew it could research gun violence if it wanted to, but they halted in fear so much because the amendment coincided with a $2.6 million cut that was directly proportional to said studies.

This new language is a false breakthrough. It accomplishes nothing. There’s no new budget allocation; no new programs introduced; nothing. This clarification adds nothing in terms of helping to solve our gun issue. And it will most likely stay that way with a Republican-controlled amd NRA-backed U.S. Congress.

This is similar to having a backyard for a dog wearing a shock collar, with a metal fence outlining the electrical lines. Removing the fence doesn’t make the dog any more free, because it’s still going to get shocked the moment it jumps the line.

We’ve had this problem before, with cigarettes in the ‘50s and seatbelts in the ‘70s. Smoking and traffic deaths were labeled as public health crises, so we studied them and came up with seatbelt laws and smoking bans and regulations.

The American Medical Association declared gun violence a public health threat this year, and we need real support to study this crisis so everyone can feel more safe.

About the Writer
Garrett Kluever, Advertising Manager

Garrett Kluever, Advertising Manager

Email: [email protected]

Connect: LinkedIn

2 Comments

2 Responses to “Congressional ban on gun control”

  1. Pwete Allen on April 24th, 2018 6:28 am

    Should the results of the more than 58,000 gun laws that have already been put in place over the last 528 years count for nothing? should the fact that not even one solitary exception to an almost unending series of bloody failures be totally ignored? That history should be the most important consideration, not the least.

    Ask yourself where gun control has reduced crime, made anyone safer or done anything a sane person would consider good is exactly zero.

    Statistically, we could print out the probability that the next restrictive gun law will be a bloody failure on about a half ream of typewriter paper. Calling for gun control is no more or less than urging more of the same patent medicine that sent the United States homicide rate soaring from four murders per million population to 90 in six years.

    Calling for gun control is begging for a repeat of the laws that sent London’s gun crime rate frm 17 crimes in three years in a city of eight million to an average of 14 reported gun crimes a day in London, and transformed the United Kingdom into the most violent industrialized society on Earth.

    On the evidence, Congress would save more than 10,000 lives a year if it did preempt gun laws.

    Pete Allen

  2. Adam on April 27th, 2018 10:27 pm

    Correlating gun laws with gun violence is a false comparison. During the same time period other issues and changes have to be considered. Terrible laws that put people in prison for minor offenses and imprisoning people without jury trials because defendants are bullied by prosecutors who don’t want to have to try the cases leads to desperate people.

    There are literally hundreds of laws that have to be considered and other societal changes, such as politicians spouting and legitimizing hate language.

    A simple fact of the matter is that automatic weapons do not protect any civilians but rather lead to mass killings. They arent needed for hunting and they wont protect anyone. Even for the conspiracy theorists who believe the government wants to take their rights away, automatic rifles wont protect them. What is their AR 15 going to do to tanks and drones?

The Royal Purple encourages readers to voice their opinions via the online comments section. Comments may be monitored for appropriateness and viewer safety. If a comment is harassing, threatening or inappropriate in nature, it may be taken down with editor's discretion.

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Founded 1901
Congressional ban on gun control