Below the Radar: The Gun Safety Board and Research Act of 2019

Warning Take Action Call Protest
Warning Take Action Call Protest

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- Sometimes, legislation intended to attack the Second Amendment doesn’t go after our rights directly or indirectly. Yet it can still be a threat, and it warrants strong opposition because the effects will be used in future attacks. This legislation, though, often will fly under the radar because of its indirect approach.

This is the case with HR 4177, the Gun Safety Board and Research Act of 2019, introduced by Representative Mark Desaulnier (D-CA). According to a release from his office, the legislation will create a so-called “Gun Safety Board.” This board would be responsible for doing research and for proposing what the release calls “evidence-based” solutions.

However, we should not be fooled. This Gun Safety Board is not out to look at the facts objectively. Just look at what Desaulnier has on his Congressional web page – a separate page that discusses what he calls “America’s Gun Problem.” The numbers there are a host of out-of-context claims and a fair bit of demonizing the National Rifle Association.

So, we can assume with a fair degree of certainty just from the background that this is not going to be a board with a mandate to take an objective look at the stats. We also can assume this because, according to the text of the legislation, this board is being placed under the Department of Health and Human Services. This is where the Centers for Disease Control is also placed.

Second Amendment supporters should take time to brush up on the history of CDC advocacy for gun control. Because that is what this board will be intended to carry out – using the veneer of science. In essence, Desaulnier’s plan is to treat our constitutional rights as a disease to be eradicated.

What is so diabolical is that this legislation is not a direct attack. Desaulnier and other anti-Second Amendment extremists are instead just asking for “research” into the issue. They will claim that they want experts to look into the issue. But which experts will they find? Ones like Arthur Kellerman or Katherine Kaufer Christoffel.

Kellerman’s 1993 study is still used these days to claim guns do not provide an effective means of self-defense. Of course, we all know (or should know) that Kellerman skewed the data by simply noting fatalities. But most people who use guns for self-defense don’t even have to fire a shot. Often, the sight of the potential victim being armed ended the attempt to commit a crime.

Second Amendment supporters should take the time to contact their Senators and Representative, and politely urge them to oppose this legislation. We don’t need to see taxpayer-funded anti-Second Amendment propaganda.


 

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Subscribe
Notify of
36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
loveaduck
loveaduck
1 year ago

Right on target. Alas, my reps are too far left on gun control.

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
1 year ago
Reply to  loveaduck

loveaduck, You must be one of my neighbors.

loveaduck
loveaduck
1 year ago

WA state

John Dow
John Dow
1 year ago

Note that in the list of board members, there’s nobody from an organization that teaches/supports gun safety. Hmmmmmm.

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J
1 year ago

Another useless bureaucratic waste of taxpayers money. A deterent of equal or greater force is required to repel or subdue hostile intent. End of study.

willheavy
willheavy
1 year ago

Here is a copy of what I’m sending to my Senators and Representatives. You can send one to yours at: Representatives: https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative Senators: https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm I heavily advise against support or passage of HR 4117 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4177) or a Senate equivalent. This bill is advocating establishment of a taxpayer funded “research” board into “gun violence”. We already know that violent crime has been decreasing year-on-year since 1993 (https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/09/30/new-fbi-data-violent-crime-still-falling), and to inflate the myth of violence perpetuated by “guns” (and not violence perpetuated by criminals) gun control advocates have to include suicide rates into a vague “gun violence” to ensure an “increased” statistic.… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 year ago
Reply to  willheavy

@wh, good letter. Can I use it as a basis?

Pete
Pete
1 year ago

Let’s ask the criminal element in this country to attack just demonrat politicians and will see how they like.

Gindy
Gindy
1 year ago

Come on guys! This is what’s wrong with getting anything done. An article is presented with useful information on what’s going on below the radar and Dave Workman adds a comment on how dangerous it really is and adds “nobody should be asleep at the wheel here.” This should bring out comments from those of us that have more information to add so that, as we move along, government proposals like this can be stopped in its tracks . Following Dave Workman’s reply, Revelator starts off with positive feedback, but once Moe spews out a worthless, pathetic, statement everybody follows… Read more »

Stafngrimr446
Stafngrimr446
1 year ago
Reply to  Gindy

Newbie here, a friend sent a link to the article.

You bring up good points Gindy…especially about reading all the ideas and Reasons presented. Knowledge is some of our best ammunition.

Rule #1 since the old Usenet days, Don’t Feed the Trolls. Rebut with better ideas, yes, but don’t swallow the bait.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Stafngrimr446

“Rebut with better ideas, yes, but don’t swallow the bait.”

That is destroying their arguments with facts/evidence. I’ve spent years trying to tell people that here. 🙂

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 year ago
Reply to  Stafngrimr446

, Welcome aboard! Be warned, however, this is a knowledgeable and sometimes rough crowd.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

@Wild Bill It’s only truly rough if people let ego and opinion get the better of them in the face of evidence based arguments. But that is a problem with human nature. We do welcome all, but we also hold people accountable for their words and actions in the hopes of building them up stronger in the truth than they were before. The choice is theirs as to whether they learn from it or not, and that is when the waters get bumpy for some. Hope you are enjoying your weekend my friend. I’m off to do a little house… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 year ago
Reply to  TheRevelator

@Rev, Just giving him the safety briefing found at tab F of the SOP.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

@Wild Bill
Sadly, not as many follow such procedure, so the nomenclature itself is slightly ironic.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Gindy

@Gindy If you took that as positive feedback on the article, then you don’t really know me. The idea of Harold trying to present something as a new strategy from the left when it is the same old tactic they have tried to use for decades that people like myself have been talking and warning about for the duration of it needs pointing out. Basically the article is little more than “Fluffing” on Harold’s part. As for calling out Moe, it got your attention that’s for sure. In the end when Trolls like moe show up here there are a… Read more »

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
1 year ago
Reply to  Gindy

@Gindy – Peckerheads like moe have to be beaten down in the comments because everything lives forever on the internet including Ammoland articles and the comments that follow them. God forbid 10 years from now, some noob reads moe’s dreck and falls for it; so we counter his BS with truth, facts, and evidence. Just as we do for Little Quisling Harold, who also lies and gets caught at it. And some of those you think are trolls, or whatever, are actually sockpuppet accounts of some of the diehard peckerheaded idiots that we have to constantly counter, correct & shout… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 year ago
Reply to  Gindy

@Gindy, If you like Workman’s comment here, then you would really like his column in the April issue of “Guns”.

nrringlee
nrringlee
1 year ago

Here is the real gun problem in America. You all are not getting to the range enough and dirtying up your guns. Secondly, you are not cleaning them. So get hot with the ammo and then the Hoppes and solve this crisis. And thinking about how the progressive new left wants to solve this so called crisis they want to use the same folks who normally work on Ebola and Corona to work on the Smith and Wesson. What I suggest is this: Let’s have every federal agency trade missions. WE can have the Marine Corps take up toxic spill… Read more »

Dave Workman
1 year ago

Nicely done Harold. I’ve mentioned similar state-level legislation in Washington earlier here at Ammoland and did a piece on it at Liberty Park Press this week:
https://www.libertyparkpress.com/activism-counts-according-to-virginia-dem-who-helped-nix-northam-ban/

Nobody should be asleep at the wheel here. This is a new subtle strategy: Create a bureaucracy, which is publicly funded, to support erosion of the 2A. In WA, they’re calling it the Office of Firearm Safety and Violence Prevention. Clever, eh?

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
1 year ago
Reply to  Dave Workman

This isn’t really a new strategy, Dave. I seem to recall previous administrations using the CDC to push fake ‘science’ that ‘proved’ guns are dangerous and should be banned. The only difference is they’ve taken this old gimmick to the state level so instead of one monster to slay, we have 50.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Flatt

Flatt
That was what my comment talking about grant money was referring to, but it wasn’t just limited to the CDC. Some of that money went to “Academics” and other groups for a multi-front push on so called “research.”

I’m sure you will remember the college professor who wrote a book about how colonial America and people in the “Wild west” were mostly unarmed people and went around trying to tell everyone how his book was the “Real story” of our history.

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
1 year ago
Reply to  TheRevelator

@The Revelator – Yeah, thanks for jogging my memory, I remember that fake historian. Literally making stuff up as he went along.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago

“This board would be responsible for doing research and for proposing what the release calls “evidence-based” solutions.”…. ” Yeah, we’ve seen that kind of junk research before from misuse of gov’t grant money. Actually had legislation to stop it. “The numbers there are a host of out-of-context claims and a fair bit of demonizing the National Rifle Association.” Well, the numbers may be out of context but it is safe to say the National Rifle Association has done enough over the last 10 years to warrant some demonization, and thus far has done nothing to fix the problem aside from… Read more »

moe mensale
moe mensale
1 year ago

There are no grown ups in the Ammoland Cancel Culture Club. Just fake 2nd Amendment advocates lacking any form of tolerance.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  moe mensale

@wjd Moe is just in his bleeding cycle is all. Considering he never wishes to engage in a debate examining evidence, whether historical or empirical, perhaps what his idea of “Cancel Culture” is happens to be when people present evidence which he cannot argue against or takes his argument apart so thoroughly as to render him little more than a simpering idiot before everyone’s eyes. At least that would explain why none of his comments offer up anything meeting the requirements of substance, but rather consist only of whining complaints and personal attacks against people he wants to cancel out… Read more »

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  TheRevelator

@wjd And you never will. If he had to come back in, that might mean he would have to provide something of substance or merit. That means it can be examined and tested, and that is very bad news for little ol’ Moe. Examination of evidence always wins on the side of truth, which is why those who run away from it expose themselves as frauds and liars even if they try to keep from saying anything that might give them away. That is the penalty of lying for an opinion. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. 🙂… Read more »

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  TheRevelator


Really? I had him pegged as being closer to Hillary.

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
1 year ago
Reply to  TheRevelator

– You can’t reel Moe back in because he’s enagaging in drive-by editorialization. He gives an opinion with no intention of sticking around and hashing it out. Make pronouncement and drive on. He doesn’t even understand what left-wing “cancel culture” is, so he misapplies the phrase to the debate here.

With sloppy thinkers like him, it would be a miracle if he gave a precise, cogent perspective on anything and then stuck around to explain his thinking and why he thinks he’s right.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Flatt

Flatt
About sums it up.

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Flatt

, It’s the Derp rageface meme

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
1 year ago
Reply to  moe mensale

Moe, are you still going on about cancel culture? Lacking any form of tolerance? Really? You’re still here as are our resident trolls. If any of what you’re saying was true, they and you would be gone. Your existence disproves your words.

StWayne
StWayne
1 year ago
Reply to  moe mensale

There can be no tolerance nor any negotiating when it comes to those looking to shred the 2A of the Constitution. It is not yours to do with as you please, although many on the left “assume” that privilege. It’s because of this, that you can expect no further “discussions” on the subject, if only because it’s not open to debate, just the heel of our patriotic boot.

Grigori
Grigori
1 year ago

Thanks once again Harold, for keeping us informed of these tragedies-in-the-making!

In keeping us thus informed, I think you have found yourself a truly useful niche.

moe mensale
moe mensale
1 year ago
Reply to  Grigori

Yeah, bad legislation IS a future tragedy. But you have no way of discerning that being a member of the Ammoland Cancel Culture Club. Enjoy your useless niche.

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
1 year ago
Reply to  moe mensale

Moe, you might want to find out what “cancel culture” is before using the term.