I do remember having read that a lot of law enforcement agencies don't collect, or collect in a way that makes it hard to tabulate shootings by officers- but a) I don't have a cite for that, it was a while ago, and b) that's also up to individual enforcement agencies, not federal.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment_(1996)
- The Congressman Who Restricted Gun Violence Research Has Regrets: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jay-dickey-gun-violence-...
- The ban has supposedly been lifted: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/14/...
- Some more history: http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2013/02/gun-violence.as...
- some background: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-gun-re...
And I love this entry on a blog site (Forbes): Why The Centers For Disease Control Should Not Receive Gun Research Funding: https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/12/why-the-ce...
The reasoning? "There was a very good reason for the gun violence research funding ban. Virtually all of the scores of CDC-funded firearms studies conducted since 1985 had reached conclusions favoring stricter gun control. "
I ask because there are plenty of other such cases. We decide how much to spend on freeway construction and maintenance vs lives saved. We study the dangers, additivity etc of smoking and decide it's better to place some restrictions on people's presumed freedom of choice in order to, ironically, improve their in practice freedom of choice. We restrict the absoluteness of some peoples' freedom of association to improve everyone's freedom of association, using data to determine where this might be appropriate and how much. Etc etc.
What I have said is true regardless if you think the right to bear arms is absolute or if you think it's absolutely abhorrent, much less if your position is in between. Do you believe that science has no bearing on morality of any kind, or only on the topic of guns?
You can have gun rights and gun control you know..