Anti-gunners wail that the Center for Disease Control doesn’t study firearms deaths enough. Thanks to Reason magazine, we discover that the CDC did study armed citizens use of firearms in self-defense…and the results were overwhelmingly positive.

So, it was hidden until recently.

One wonders who buried that, and why…

Read about it here.


  1. The CDC has no business studying guns, violence or anything else that is not a disease. Of course, they do a horrible job with actual diseases, as with Coronavirus, a disease that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans where the only treatments prescribed were shame, ineffective masks and vaccines that didn’t prevent it.

    Our scientific community has gone from one championing innovation & exploration to one of hide-bound institutionalism & turf protection. We paid billions for then new Webb space telescope but as soon as it’s findings questioned the 1930’s Big Bang Theory , the old guard astronomy community wants to shut down all discussion. The end of debate & the end of innovation is the end of a nation.

    • Mark, you are so off base claiming that the vaccines haven’t prevented the further spread of Coronavirus (or more importantly, mitigated the symptoms and long term effects of the disease to those vaccinated who still acquired it). But what would I know… I’m just a healthcare professional who has spent the last two plus years trying to keep COVID patients alive and sometimes holding their hands as they died from the disease. I suppose when your car needs to be repaired you rely on the advice and skills of your local baker.

      FYI: In these two plus years, I’ve had two vaccinated patients die from the disease. Two. And in the case of one of them, while he claimed to be vaccinated, no record could be found of him receiving even one vaccination dose. I don’t honestly know how many unvaccinated I’ve seen die from the disease in my ICU, but at times it was several each day.

      I agree with you though regarding the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention having no business studying gun deaths and injuries (with the exception of studying mental illnesses that can and sometimes do lead to violence). Blaming guns for deaths is like blaming pencils for misspelled words.

      • Vaccination does two things. It helps keep you out of the hospital, and lowers your risk of death. That’s it. It doesn’t prevent you from getting it, prevent you from spreading it, or help flatten the curve.

        If you are obese, suffering from co-morbidities, over the age of 65, or having any breathing issues, the vaccine might make sense. For the rest, it’s much less obvious whether you should take the shot.

      • The very serious health issues associated with the vaccines are well known to all but health care pros like you who only read left media. The shots are killing people right and left. The info is out there if you take the time to find it. Worst med we have created in many years.

    • One more thing: After spending two plus years treating COVID patients, sometimes having them cough right as I was leaning over them for procedures, I have NEVER caught COVID. Even though there was no vaccine available until December 2020. That’s because I always wore PPE when treating them. And empirical evidence has shown, the most important part of PPE for COVID is the N95 mask. You know what it is when people choose to ignore the evidence and not wear masks in indoor public places during high levels of COVID outbreaks and then die? It’s Darwinism. Don’t be one of those fools.

      • No, empirical evidence has not shown N95 masks work against respiratory viruses. You don’t even have to look at a study. You can look at Germany, where in some communities N95 was mandatory <– see this and it didn't do squat. Japan, the most masked-up nation on earth, was seeing cases through the roof not too long ago.

        If masked worked, how come they didn't stop community spread anywhere? It's because they cannot stop community spread anywhere with a respiratory virus. This used to be common knowledge that inexplicably vanished in 2020. Your anecdotal evidence of you, a healthcare worker, wearing a mask is not the same as the general public wearing masks. Also, did none of your colleagues get it? I am going to go out on a limb and say I bet that was not the case.

        The government of the UK produced a study exploring how long CV19 survived on surfaces. The 2nd-longest surface survival was on…. (drum roll)…. masks. 20 hours. They are germ-collection devices for the general public, which does not wear them the same as you. Did you stuff your N95 in your pocket at lunch? Did you drop it in the parking lot and pick it up and put it back on? Did you hang it on your car mirror? If you think human nature will automatically turn everyone into Dr. Kildare you are crazy. Perhaps the reason you didn't catch covid is because you were naturally immune? I don't know why this thought never crossed your mind.

        I never caught covid, either. I never wore a mask unless forced to on a plane (I refused to wear it the entire time) and I did not participate in the lockdowns. I was in indoor crowded places in 2020 and 2021. I personally do not know anyone who did not catch it except for me and my dad. There seems to be some natural immunity for some, we simply do not know. Maybe you and I got through it via blind luck. It sure wasn't because of masks.

      • An actual N95 mask, properly fitted, is effective in protecting the wearer from viruses, but the cloth and surgical masks worn by the vast majority of people who don’t have access to N95 masks are a joke and the Washington swamp creatures know this and lied about it. One would have been as well protected from the China Bat Virus if they carried a rabbit’s foot or lucky coin.

      • I have used N 95 masks for things like sanding wood and metal, body work, grinding, sandblasting etc. After half an hour suffering through wearing the infernal thing, I have to take a break. I remove the filthy mask, look in the mirror and obzerve the reverse Zorro mask syndrome….. the mask TRAPS much of thefine particulate, silica dust, paint dust, etc it then sticks to my face, beard, I blow large quantities of that garbage out my nose, then have to take a break for half an hour to recover from the hypoxia. I feel the grit in my teeth, in my mouth, and on my fact.Each tiny particle stuck to my face, up my nose, etc, is thousands of times larger than that silly little corona virus particle.

        In other words, if the N 95 cannot keep those huge boulders of sand, paind dust, grit, grindstone powder, out of my nose and lungs, they SURELY will not keep that viral particle out, it being a thousand or more times smaller.

        N 95 masks? PSYCHOTROPIC nonsense. I never wore any mask, never got the infernal disease. Norhave I ever taken any seasonal flu, shingles, etc, shots, nor have I ever contracted any of THOSE diseases. And I fall into TWO “high risk” demographic categories.

        Eat right, stay active, take yer vidieyums and some zinc, and just go about living your life as if nothing was wrong… cause nothing IS.

    • Mark & John Mohan,

      Even though this is not a medical forum, I do appreciate that you both shared ideas about COVID. Since I know so little about medicine, I am reliant on experts to know what to do. It’s frustrating when the experts disagree. I don’t know what to believe.

      Someday someone will write about this period, and will tell us what did and what did not happen to release that virus on the world. They will tell us what did, and what did not work to treat it, and whether the masks and lockdowns did good or harm. Till then, I am confused, but I don’t mind listening to people trying to educate me.

      The first lockdown started in March 2020. In all this time, I know ONE PERSON who has died from COVID. Seems to me COVID was a threat to people with weak immune systems, but someone with more knowledge than I have will counter that argument. I’m so confused.

      Donald Trump and 80% of the medical community took the vaccine, but I have friends who tell me I am going to die because I took it. If the vaccine was harmful, why would a physician give it to himself and his family members?

      • Esteemed Roger Wilco, I am proud to say that I got vaccinated, got one booster, and still got urgent-clinic-confirmed Covid-19 last month. I do feel that the shots prevented some symptom severity. I got a little soreness in the right foot, which is a nuisance, but beats full-blown chilblains or terminal pneumonia. So I thank Dr. Fauci personally for all the good that he may have done. I just wish that he and some other fellows were not so apparently associated with gain-of-function research in the gung-ho erstwhile land of Mao, whose soldiers and allies used to tie the hands of groups of captured Allied soldiers behind their backs and shoot them in the head. All I can say is that somebody was comparatively recently playing with some very shaky bio-war dynamite, and that lots of money was involved.

      • @ Roger Willco – “Someday someone will write about this period, and will tell us what did and what did not happen to release that virus on the world. They will tell us what did, and what did not work to treat it, and whether the masks and lockdowns did good or harm.”

        I am less hopeful that the truth will prevail. The World has become a wasteland of constant lies, disinformation, propaganda, narratives, and indoctrination. So much so that it has destroyed my faith in the truth and my faith in humanity to have a core of decency to support the truth.

        They say that “History is written by the Victors”. What if the people who have profited by all these lies and falsehoods end up writing the history of these times? Do you expect that these compulsive liars will write down a true history to leave for our children and grandchildren? Or, will they instead write down a “narrative” that justifies all of their actions and that suppresses the despicable parts?

        Who know, perhaps in a century or two we will have the benefits of a dispassionate historian who will “have no ax to grind” and who will tell it straight. Even so, I have my doubts. It is possible that Hillary’s example will prevail and any damning records will have been given the “smash and bleach-bit” treatment. That future, theoretical “honest” historian may only have “approved” document to use for his research.

        Quote of the Day:

        “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” – George Orwell from his Novel 1984

      • Someday someone will write about this period, and will tell us what did and what did not happen

        much of that writing has already been done, but has been seriously and wrongly suppressed by those who were in control and wished to remain so. True story. Plenty of information and signficant research available, just not in lamestream media, the twit verse, Fakebook, etc, nor in any government sources. Conspiracy? Sure looks that way to me and many others.

        As to the physicians taking and giving the shot which is likely harmful, most of them are just doing what they are told to do. Many excellent MD’s have had their licenses to practice medicine susmended or revoked simply for administering HCQ and vitamins/zinc instead of juet letting their patients die from the disease, or, worse, shoving a respirator down their throats, almost always a death sentence. Many other valid treatments were declared “off limits” by the clowns running the circus. It almost seemed as if all their medical training was suddenly deemed useless or wrong/evil because it was the chinese virus.

  2. So nice to see the U.S. government bury evidence that is supportive of our civil rights. Deliberate subverting of freedom sans consequence.

    If only the NYS legislature and governor had access to this…concealed carry would probably not be banned in NYS beginning 9/1/22. But it is essentially…nearly all public spaces in the state are now “sensitive places” and hence “gun free zones.” This whole state is a “fun free zone.”

    Oh right, the “esteemed” NYS governor could care less about data:

    Is there any wonder why this country is on the brink?

    • I don’t know. The NYS legislature and governor are sufficiently hostile to personal freedoms and individual rights that if they had this data they’d probably push for even harsher bans.

      Remember: It’s never about saving lives; it’s always about control. And if they can’t get their “official” enforcers to suppress individual rights, they’ll empower their allies — the criminal class — to do it instead, whether by establishing “soft on crime” regulations and “revolving door” bail policies, or criminalizing self-defense (read: making criminals’ careers safer).

      In New York, gun owners will soon be getting it from both ends; both the State and the criminal class are empowered against them.

      And while NYS — and Oregon, California, etc. — are passing laws further restricting gun ownership and lawful self-defense (often in direct contravention of Heller, McDonald, and Bruen), other states are going the opposite direction and enacting Constitutional Carry, which is just one more example of the cultural conflicts that are tearing this country apart. (Oregon is being sneaky about it and doing it via full-court-ad-press ballot initiative [with the politicians taking clear sides] instead of legislative action, which makes it much more “interesting” [read: more difficult] to challenge in court.)

  3. This isn’t really news. Kleck published his analysis several years ago, and again, his revised analysis.

    Perhaps the controversy over extrapolating the CDC’s sample to the nation could best be resolved by listing the states that were covered along with the population of each state. That doesn’t require any massaging/manipulation. And, it would show the consistency (or lack thereof) from state to state. If the data for the sampled states were widely divergent for reasons that couldn’t be explained by, for example, relative crime rates then we could question the quality of the data. Conversely, if the divergency were understandable due to crime rates, rural/urban, demographics of the population, then that would tend to buttress the quality of the results.

    The big issue is that: CDC did the survey; CDC knew the results; CDC decided to bury the data. Is this what we the People accept as “the Science! is settled”? Spending taxpayer money on a survey and then burying the results because it tends to support the Constitution while undermining the political preferences of the bureaucrats?

    So, what else is CDC – to say nothing of other government agencies – burying?

    How about all “the Science! is settled” data on COVID-19? And the safety and efficacy of the vaccines?

    In my opinion, the CDC ought to be cut-down to a small fraction of what it is today while the functions it has heretofore presumed to perform ought to be farmed-out to state agencies. This is the model established in the 19th Century for agriculture research. Why should it not work for public health?

    We need diversity in opinion in every major area of public interest. More so in medicine than anything else.

    • The problem I have with your fifty different state agencies model is that that would let fifty different groups of politicians exert their own biases over what the agencies could and could not do. Do you really have a higher opinion of state politicians than you do federal ones? And what happens when half the agencies say one thing, and the other half say something else? And will they all liase with the World Health Organization and other international bodies?

      • no utI DO have a higher opinion of the voters in such states to keep their LOCAL BOYS in closer check. The CDC are appointed, often unvetted, and given a specific agenda, then NOT responsible to any voters at all. That’s how Phautchee was able to take over like he did.

        State agencies, on the other hand, are more respnsive, can be dealt with at the state level, and if things all go to the hot place in a handbasket, anyone can simply pack up and go find a state that has their heads screwed on reasonably straight. I can identify a number of states where I would never move to, because their state agencies are renegade and controlled by special interest factions and at least as many where I’d move if I could, as their agencies have a long track record of using the brains God gave them to come up with and implement good policies.

        The national one size controls all model of the Fed agancies is bogus. Besides, WHERE in the US Constittuion is there any authority for organisations like the CDC, etc? It ain’t there, and don’t try and feed me that carp about “the general welfare” meme. HOW that is effected in each state falls to the STATES. And the PEOPLE within each one.

    • Agreed on all points. Science — REAL science, not “The Science! is settled” faux-science — requires accounting for and/or explaining all data points.

      Real science doesn’t have an agenda other than fact.

      The CDC — along with any other government agency — does. Even if the agency is 100% non-partisan (yeah, right!), it still has an agenda, which shares at least two items with all other bureaucracies:
      1. Justify its existence and role.
      2. Strengthen and/or expand its domain.

      This is how the CDC’s mission went from “disease control and prevention” to “disease control, food safety, gun safety, and government research”. They were successful at item #2.

      So when a data set comes along that casts doubt on the agency’s existence, role, power, or area of expertise (domain), regardless of any other agenda, what is the agency to do? Publish it and justify reducing its power and reach (hah!), or bury it and ensure its continued operations?

      Real, honest science demands the former, but the bureaucrats require the latter. And because the CDC is a bureaucracy first, science outfit a distant second, they buried it.

      Diverse opinions are anathema to the bureaucracy, especially those that threaten the bureaucracy itself. They will always be buried.

  4. Well, I’m not surprised. The 1996 act that prohibited doing contagion research on gun violence was crucial in shutting down the CDC’s agenda. I was much younger then, and even before it was evident that the Feds were working as hard as they could to marginalize gun owners and the gun culture. I remember hearing from my father about the gun laws in the 1960s and 1970s that were used to keep minority groups from having guns in places like Baltimore – self-defense wasn’t for everyone, evidently. Banning “Saturday Night Specials” was just one more political step to keep poor people from having guns: rural poor people and inner-city poor people, it made little difference. Banning mail order guns was done for the same reason. Stephen Hunter has a piece online about the huge surge in crime that happened after all the M1 Carbines were repatriated in 1963-1964 through CMP/NRA – there WASN’T a surge, but mail order was eventually banned anyway b/c of the Kennedy investigation. It’s all a game to keep ordinary people defenseless.

    • Based on the revelations from Gary Kleck, I would say that 1996 act is flawed. While it does not prohibit the CDC from doing “gun violence” research if they do it neutrally (it only prohibits public funding for research intended to push a “gun control” narrative), it also doesn’t require them to publish studies whose data opposes a “gun control” agenda.

      By law, they can’t use tax money to fund “gun control”-pushing studies, but they are still free to bury studies that support individual gun rights.

      So they may fund all the non-partisan studies they want, cherry-pick the ones that happen to support their chosen narrative for publishing, and sweep the rest under the rug. I believe they tried it in the 90s; the plan only fell apart when they did three separate polls and ALL of them undermined the “gun control” narrative.

      How often do you see three government studies in consecutive years, asking substantively the same questions? Typically, when the answer comes back, that’s the answer, and absent dramatic societal changes there’s no reason to repeat the study. So why would they do multiple polls, if not to try for one that by random chance supports their agenda while appearing neutral?

      The CDC is anti-gun. That much is clear at this point. They are not prohibited from doing “gun violence” research; just research that pushes a “gun control” agenda. When all their neutrally-done studies support gun rights, which works better for them: to admit their studies counter their agenda, or to bury the results and fall back on “We can’t do ‘gun violence’ research”?

  5. Millions of self-defenders’ lives and health saved, jillions of crimes prevented, and tons of money not wasted. Too easy to forget that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Looking at the impressive list of CDC leadership staff, I would be happier if Naturopathy got its own place. Without the efficacy and economy of Naturopathy, I, and a lot of others, would have perished. I am not advocating witch doctors or Rasputins, but intelligent specialists who get the job done honestly. May God support and promote more fearless health professionals willing to acknowledge and help rectify everybody’s errors. Practical autopsy expert “Deadmeat2” from the Atlanta Morgue might deserve a CDC slot, too. Too many of the deceased arrivals at the “meat houses” have been unarmed innocents.

    • Amen on naturopaths. Around here, they aren’t “quacks”; they are fully qualified doctors of “modern” medicine, who choose alternative treatments rather than pharmaceuticals (though they can still prescribe pharmaceuticals if the patient desires it).

      The way I think of it, it’s less about treating illness directly, and more about helping the body treat and prevent illness itself. A much healthier option, in my opinion.

  6. The CDC boot strapped their way into areas beyond their original scope by establishing the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. I’d have thought they’re poaching on the NIH or OSHAs turf. In any case, in a rational world, any duplication of effort should be eliminated. By taking it away from the CDC.

    Years back on another chat board a medical ethicist noted that the proper answer for any questions about firearms from a medical person should be answered with “That’s a boundary violation”.

  7. Interesting how close the two surveys were. Overall this is good for us, but most of the anti’s aren’t interested in facts. I guess no one told the blonde model with the Doberman to keep her finger off the trigger unless in the very act of shooting. (even though it’s a DA revolver)

    • Too much has been made about keeping the trigger finger straight and outside the trigger guard when not actually firing a gun. Realistically, in a situation where your opponent is holding a firearm and/or in the process of pointing it, your finger should be on the trigger and in the case of a double action revolver, applying slight pressure on it. Very few of us are as good as Ed McGiven or Jerry Miculek and split seconds count in a gunfight. Besides, with a double action revolver’s relatively heavy, long trigger pull, it’s easy to miss a target under stressful conditions, even at short range. The same goes for manual safeties on pistols like the 1911. If you have a gun pointed at a suspect armed with a gun, that safety should be disengaged and your finger barely touching the trigger. The bad guy/gal doesn’t have to do something obvious, like turn towards you to shoot. They can simply flex their wrist and fire off several shots in the hope of striking you and a good hit can be disabling whether it’s aimed or accidental. I’m not a very good shot and want any advantage I can get while maintaining reasonable safety. If you wish to be fair to the goblins and give your attacker(s) an even chance, go right ahead. I prefer to win a gunfight and one can still be relatively safe while doing that.

  8. Allopathic medicine: When patients die of the cure. When you see children and adults immediately suffering from blood clots, to the brain, becoming paraplegic, lose of cognitive, and dying from these so called vaccines. The human body can’t handle these ingredients: v 17, 2021 · Vaccine Ingredients: (in addition to the virus strain (s) being vaccinated against) version 1: filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA), pertactin (PRN), fimbriae types 2 and 3 (FIM), aluminum phosphate, 2-phenoxyethanol, water, polysorbate 80, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, bovine serum albumin, 2-phenoxyethanol, neomycin, polymyxin B sulfate.
    It it comes from the U.S. Govt. theres a BIG chance it’s not OUR cure, but their problem, the publics reaction, their plandemic solution. No thanks, my body my choice stick yourselves, but you won’t be sticking me. CDC- 2 P off.

    • you forgot to list PEG, poly ethylene glycol.

      For those not versed in organic chemistry that is the active/effecgive ingredient in ANTIFREEZE, the liquid you pour into your car’s cooling system to keep the water from freezing in the winter. Anyone ever heard of leaving a pan of that lying about, and the family dog or cat drinking it, and DYING? Read the caution labels on the jug you buy from AutoZone. Says POISON DO NOT DRINK. That’s why they put those obnoxious locking caps on the jug, so kids are marginally less likely to be able to open it then drink it.

      They put THAT came chemical into the covid shots. Don’t believe me, go and find a complete list of ingredients for those. Two out of the three brands available here in the US contain it.

  9. “One wonders who buried that, and why…”

    It was buried because the results did not support the Left’s favored narrative. Remember the immortal words of our Glorious Leader, Joe Biden: “We choose TRUTH over FACTS!” (See this link):

    For the American Left, the “Narrative is the THING” (to paraphrase Shakespeare).

    The Left has thousands of people who’s sole job is to sit around and think up “narratives” that can be pushed upon The People to mislead and deceive them. The Left lives on Lies. In this context, simply suppressing the data (a lie of omission) is as “Easy as Pie”.

    Let me give you an example. I recently received a survey from the ACLU. At one time, the ACLU was a serious organization dedicated to defending our Constitutional Rights. It has since been penetrated by Left-Wing Activists and turned into “yet another” left-wing political pressure group.

    I looked over the questions on their survey. Every one was either a “leading” question that presupposes a preferred answer, or a high-end generality that could be twisted to mean anything, or both. Here are some of the questions:

    Q) How concerned are you about extremists escalating their state-by-state attacks on the fundamental freedoms embodies in the Constitution? The answer choices ranged from “Very Concerned” to “Not Concerned at All”.

    This is a high-end generality. Of course, we should all be concerned about such “extremists”. From my perspective, this is “projection’ since I view the American Left as “escalating their state-by-state attacks on the fundamental freedoms”. Especially since they have been ruthlessly exploiting Covid-19 and Climate-Change for political advantage. Yet, if I were to answer this question as “very concerned”, the ACLU could “interpret” my response as “Americans are very concerned about the activities of Right-Wing extremists across the States”. The open-ended nature of the question allows for such “twisting”.

    Another example question:

    Q) The escalating assault on reproductive rights, including highly restrictive abortion bans and the upcoming Supreme Court case that could severely limit access to abortion? Again, the answers range from Very Concerned to Not Concerned.

    This is a leading question. It assumes that the responder is “Pro-Choice”. A person with Pro-Life views cannot answer this question without accepting the premise that “Pro-Choice” is the correct approach.

    All fourteen (14) questions, on the survey, are like this. The survey is “designed” to elicit a Left-Wing ideological response or, at a minimum, the results can be twisted to support such a response. The survey then goes on to ask for a donation to the ACLU.

    As long-time readers of this blog know, they “choose poorly” when they sent their survey to me! I will tear up their garbage survey and toss it into the trash.

    However, this survey is more insidious than being just another rigged poll. It asks for a response by September 15. Assuming one month to collate the data and “massage” it to support the “correct narrative”, the ACLU will probably release the results of their so-called “survey” to a willing Media around Mid-October. Just in time for the Media to use it as propaganda for the upcoming Mid-Term Elections.

    So, the American Left, working with their ACLU subsidiary, have planned this “October Surprise” for months in advance of the November Mid-Terms. No doubt, they had a “think tank” dream up this stroke for them.

    With the Left, it is all about the “Narrative”. In some cases, they will exploit an item of news, on the fly, to twist for their benefit (like the George Floyd or Zimmerman Cases). In other cases, they work and plan for months to have a narrative set-up and ready to go at the proper time.

    “We choose TRUTH over FACTS”, Biden said. What he should have said is: “We choose our NARRATIVES over REALITY”.

Comments are closed.