By Alan Chwick & Joanne Eisen
New York –-(Ammoland.com)- When Vivek Murthy was nominated as the next U.S. Surgeon General, proponents of the Second Amendment responded very negatively to the choice.
The prospect of a Surgeon General who has demonstrated strong anti-gun sentiment is just one more demonstration of the intent of our government to disarm us.
And, looking into his past, it is easy to understand why.
Dr. Murthy believes that firearms violence should be viewed as a public health problem. That is, firearms violence would be treated as a disease. Using the medical science of epidemiology, firearms would be observed for patterns that might help to detect the sources and possible cures of the illness of violence.
However, firearms are not viruses and cannot be treated like viruses. Using the science of epidemiology would give the ‘antis’ the ability to create some very dangerous lies and slip them to the public as “science”.
That's exactly what happened in the not to distant past. Anti-gun doctors and researchers deliberately lied about the negatives of civilian gun possession. They misused the science of epidemiology in order demonize weapons and their owners.
An unbiased group of doctors and lawyers explained, “Given the urgent needs of political advocacy, academic health sages all too often feel no compunction about asserting falsehoods, fabricating statistics, and falsifying references to counterfeit support for them.” (Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?) That's a very nice way to say that the anti-gun doctors “LIED”.
A look at the linked paper gives an in depth explanation of exactly how the the data was faked in order to skew the outcome and find that civilian firearms were dangerous to society. The pattern of deception that was found shows that the anti-gun doctors were deliberate and clever in their lies to the public.
Those anti-gun doctors , using our taxes as the funding they required for their project, created a vast body of false and misleading medical literature. Hundreds of fake research articles were produced, in the U.S. and globally. This information was used by the media to create fear of guns among the unknowing populace and encouraged our politicians to vote for poor legislation. .
Dr. Edgar Suter, in 1994, in the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia, wrote, “ Errors of fact, design, and interpretation abound in the medical literature on guns and violence…Lobbyists and other partisans continue to promulgate the fallacies that cloud the public debate…”
Because the lies were so shockingly flagrant, Congress eventually terminated this funding to the CDC, but not before a great deal of damage was done. Those lies are still being used by gun phobes today. After all, aren't guns in the home dangerous? The gun control lobby can prove it to be so.
One of the problems that would arise if Dr. Murthy is approved, is that he would be in a position to spur an increase funding, in gun research, so that new outrageous research studies could begin again to frighten the American public into making poor choices about self- defense for themselves and their families.
The intent to deceive and coerce the population is still present. Describing a recent report from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, John R. Lott, Jr. of the Crime Prevention Research Center, charges, “they have not only exaggerated their conclusions but have fabricated numbers. And these incorrect numbers have then been used to push for more regulations.” Lott explains that in a report of school shootings, most of the incidents used in the statistics had nothing to do with the public's perception of the definition of a school shootings.
We authors believe, after studying the research for years, that children are safest when civilians can legally keep a firearm in the home. Our towns and cities, our neighbors, and our society are all safer where civilians own guns. Yet those who don't have the time or inclination to read these reports can be swayed by the shear volume of the ‘junk science’ reports and by its repetition from the media. The culture of acceptance of the presence of weapons is at risk.
The liars now feel free to tell us exactly how they feel and what they want to do to the Second Amendment.
In Wash DC, Mark Witaschek was arrested, tried and convicted for the attempted possession of unlawful ammunition. During a New York demonstration against the not-so- Safe Act, police confiscated a piece of plywood cut into the shape of a gun. These demonstrators and others like them have been characterized in the media as crazed gun nuts, and unhinged dummies.
Yet, in McAllen, Texas, it was reported in 1996 that doctors are relying on reality and practicality rather than on their colleague's research papers. After one of them was shot by an unhappy patient, they are “stocking up on fire power”.
We hope that Dr. Murthy fails to become Surgeon General. Many of our Democrat politicians are becoming realistic and accepting the notion that too many people are fed up with lies. The New York Times reported recently that our NRA is warning politicians that a vote for Murthy is not acceptable.
We can no longer permit those who lie to determine our future. It is never wise to empower leaders who fund liars. It is damned stupid to tolerate those who call us names. And it is inconsistent with the free future of our kids if we gun owners can't unify behind staunch freedom loving politicians.
Mr. Alan J. Chwick has been involved with firearms much of his life, and is currently the Managing Coach of the Freeport Junior Club (FJC), at the Freeport NY Revolver & Rifle Association, Freeport, NY.
Dr. Joanne D. Eisen practices dentistry on Long Island, NY. She has collaborated and written on firearm politics for the past 20 years, and is a Senior Fellows at the Independence Institute in Denver, CO.