Are they kidding?
Gun-law demise worries health experts
End of assault-weapon ban may add to trauma costs[snip]
Specifics aside, what the assault-weapons ban really did was make injury prevention a national priority, medical experts said.
“For a decade, we had a national consensus that included the policymakers that we had to be careful, at least a bit careful, about what kind of weapons we put out there,” said Dr. Katherine Kaufer Christoffel, a professor of pediatrics and preventive medicine at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine.
“What the elimination of the assault-weapons ban says to me is we’re going back to viewing this as a purely criminal-justice issue and not a public-health issue, and I think that’s a mistake, a turn in the wrong direction.”
Freedom is not a public-health issue, you loon. Additionally, since these weapons were involved in an underwhelming less than one percent of crimes, it’s quite a stretch to speculate on it’s impact on health care costs. Those costs will be insignificant if not non-existent.
September 24th, 2004 at 1:52 am
Yeah but don’t you know? “Assault Weapons” are the most injurious kind of weapon, I mean just look at all those scary features. “Assault Weapons are even allowed to have bayonet lugs allowing the attachment of a [gasp] bayonet! All that trauma caused by bayonets and the gun nuts just don’t care. Forget the Bill of Rights and think of the CHILDREN!