YAS (Yet Another Study), this one by pediatricians and reported in American Association of Pediatrics (AAP) News concludes:
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2019/07/11/peds.2018-3283
Well now.
That pro-gun bastion of conservative thought, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), reported that the study had some shortcomings which were freely admitted by the authors. Never the less, despite any shortcomings the study might have had the predictable shrill headlines came forth.
“Study Finds an Easy Way to Save Kids Lives”
https://splinternews.com/study-finds-an-easy-way-to-save-kids-lives-1836387680
“Fewer children die from gun violence in states with tougher gun laws, study finds”
https://www.oregonlive.com/business...states-with-tougher-gun-laws-study-finds.html
“Child gun deaths lower in states with stricter gun laws”
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/child-gun-deaths-lower-states-stricter-gun-laws/story?id=64388062
And finally:
“A Weak New Gun Study”
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-weak-new-gun-study/
But the last one is from the National Review which actually is a bastion of right wing, conservative thought. (I was kidding when I said PBS was conservative.)
The ABC news article had a couple of points I thought were interesting.
ABC News, and some of the other articles, pointed out that the study used data from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to rate states on the strictness of their gun laws.
So why do I bring this stuff up? Well, I think it’s important to know what’s going on out there.
In this 5-year analysis, states with stricter gun laws and laws requiring universal background checks for firearm purchase had lower firearm-related pediatric mortality rates. These findings support the need for further investigation to understand the impact of firearm legislation on pediatric mortality.
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2019/07/11/peds.2018-3283
Well now.
That pro-gun bastion of conservative thought, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), reported that the study had some shortcomings which were freely admitted by the authors. Never the less, despite any shortcomings the study might have had the predictable shrill headlines came forth.
“Study Finds an Easy Way to Save Kids Lives”
https://splinternews.com/study-finds-an-easy-way-to-save-kids-lives-1836387680
“Fewer children die from gun violence in states with tougher gun laws, study finds”
https://www.oregonlive.com/business...states-with-tougher-gun-laws-study-finds.html
“Child gun deaths lower in states with stricter gun laws”
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/child-gun-deaths-lower-states-stricter-gun-laws/story?id=64388062
And finally:
“A Weak New Gun Study”
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-weak-new-gun-study/
But the last one is from the National Review which actually is a bastion of right wing, conservative thought. (I was kidding when I said PBS was conservative.)
The ABC news article had a couple of points I thought were interesting.
“I [Dr. Monika Goyal, lead study author and an associate professor of pediatrics and emergency medicine] care for children through the age of 21 and sometimes up to the age of 25. From our perspective, 18, 19, 20 year olds are children. They are part of the pediatric continuum. This is the standard.”
ABC News, and some of the other articles, pointed out that the study used data from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to rate states on the strictness of their gun laws.
So why do I bring this stuff up? Well, I think it’s important to know what’s going on out there.