NJ Democrats Want to Fund Biased Gun Research with your Tax Dollars

Bogus Research
NJ Democrats Want to Fund Biased Gun Research with your Tax Dollars

New Jersey –  -(Ammoland.com)- Since New Jersey Democrats are essentially running out of ideas for new gun laws that turn law-abiding citizens into incarcerated criminals, they have introduced a new scheme to undermine the Second Amendment – taxpayer-funded research “with a mission to provide the scientific evidence on which sound firearms violence prevention policies and programs can be based.”

Well, we at NJ2AS have news for state Senator Troy Singleton (D-7) – such attempts to stigmatize gun ownership through “academic research” have been self-defeating… just ask President Obama!

The former president issued an executive order back in 2013 along the lines of Senator Singleton’s proposed legislation, which created the Committee on Priorities for a Public Health Research Agenda to Reduce the “Threat of Firearm-Related Violence.” And after wasting $10,000,000 of hard-earned tax payer funds, the report did not seem to work in Obama's favor hence why you never heard much about the report.

First off, this only reiterates the biggest problem with the gun-control zealots: they firmly believe that all humans are innately good and non-violent and the major issue with violence is the access to an instrument like a firearm. They believe that every person is harmless, but give them a gun, and like the villain in a Hollywood movie, they become mass murderers terrorizing society.

Firearms Violence as a form of Terrorism
Firearms Violence as a form of Terrorism

Unfortunately for Obama, Bloomberg and the elitists that live life with armed security 24/7, the report didn’t produce the findings they were hoping for. What it did say is that armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker and defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals.

Also, mass shootings are declining and make up a tiny fraction of gun-related deaths. Gun buybacks don’t work, stolen guns and/or gun show purchases account for weapons in a small amount of crimes, and the vast majority of gun deaths are via suicide.

Do not believe us? Click hear to read the 100+ page report for yourself.

Senator Singleton should have second-thoughts about passing this bill and rethink his approach. Or maybe this is about a bailout for the billionaires who no longer wish to waste their money on fake research to bolster their anti-gun owner agenda.

Either way, like Obama, he will not like the results. This is the level of insanity we are up against and we need your support to help fight back. Please renew/upgrade your membership or donate by clicking here.

New Jersey Second Amendment Society
http://www.nj2as.org/

New Jersey Second Amendment Society

About New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS):

The New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS) is a NJ based non-profit, civil rights organization. Our focus and mission is to end the hostile anti-Second Amendment and self-defense sentiment within the New Jersey Legislature and community.

The NJ2AS uses innovative and bold direct-action tactics to expose, document, and take results-oriented action to confront anti-Second Amendment policies and legislators. By Defending, Protecting, and Preserving the Second Amendment within New Jersey, the NJ2AS works to ensure that our civil rights are restored, no longer degraded, and to prevent NJ from being used as a laboratory to destroy the Second Amendment nationwide.

  • 2 thoughts on “NJ Democrats Want to Fund Biased Gun Research with your Tax Dollars

    1. Apparently the numerous facts disproving the numerous false claims (and outright lies) perpetuated over the years by liberals simply don’t account for squat. Because if the “facts” don’t wholeheartedly fall-in-line with their “guns are bad” narrative, they somehow pretend the facts actually don’t exist.

      Similarly with numerous long-standing laws of the country, if a law does not precisely abide with their “feelings” regarding any particular matter, they seemingly pretend that no such laws ever existed.

      Similarly with the elections, if their chosen candidate does (did) not with the election, they pretend that no such election actually took place.

      I could very likely go on for quite some time citing similar examples of their selective, yet alternative realities.

      At least they’re relatively consistent. Unfortunately, they’re usually consistently wrong.

    2. Seems the bureaucrats would be better served if they simply examined John Lott’s mass of data. And if they don’t find what they’re looking for, ask him.

    Leave a Comment 2 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *