Is the CDC’s Gun Violence Initiative a Backdoor to Gun Control?

Is the CDC's Gun Violence Initiative a Backdoor to Gun Control?

( – Is the CDC once again going above and beyond its legislative mandate to enact Leftist policies? Throughout the pandemic, the health agency issued an edict that allowed millions of people to live rent-free. The order was clearly above and beyond the agency’s authority. On Thursday, August 26, the Supreme Court ruled the CDC didn’t have the legislative power from Congress to issue such a divisive rule and overturned the eviction ban.

Here we go again. On Friday morning, August 27, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky shared with CNN that the health agency is reviving a 1990s program to study gun violence. In April, President Joe Biden declared that the United States faced a “gun violence public health epidemic.” In light of the CDC’s mission, some question if this could be a backdoor scheme to gun control.

CDC Re-Initiates Gun Violence Study and Controversy

In the 1990s, Congress cut the CDC’s controversial program after the National Rifle Association (NRA) expressed concerns that the federal health agency would use its authority to establish a health crisis and remove guns from citizens. It sure sounds like that may be happening again considering Biden’s statement last spring and Walensky’s announcement on Friday morning.

In 1946, Congress established the CDC to combat global illnesses and infectious diseases. In 1970, Congress expanded its mission to include occupational health, family planning and reproductive health, and chronic diseases. In 1972, politicians revised the CDC’s mission once again to include injury and disability prevention.

The CDC’s authority covers a broad list of categories. However, it’s fiercely debated if the health agency’s jurisdiction extends to constitutional and policy issues, such as the right to bear arms.

That debate’s not stopping Walensky from wading into unchartered territory. She restated Biden’s assertion that gun violence is a “serious public health threat.” The director added that the violence is significantly greater than Americans hear, and officials need more time, energy, and resources to understand the problem.

Is understanding an uncomplicated problem what’s really needed, or is there another motive? Seriously, why do criminals shoot people? Is it because they are bad people lacking morals, ethics, and sound judgment? Are all accidents preventable? Aren’t they called accidents for a reason?

Sworn to Protect Your Health

Walensky says she swore to protect your health. So, consider this… how does a study do that? Isn’t a study commissioned to glean data from which to make policy decisions?

There may be some noble use to educating people on proper firearm storage and usage. However, that doesn’t solve the majority of gun violence in the country.

While Walensky says her professional mandate is to protect America’s health, is she not sworn to uphold the Constitution? The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right of gun ownership, but the CDC proved that it’s willing to exceed its authority. What happens when partisans use federal agencies to skirt the Constitution?

Walensky said she’s not “here about gun control.” At least, not today. What about tomorrow when she, Biden, or the rest of the bureaucracy decide the data suggests too many gun owners have a mental health issue and can no longer responsibly own a firearm?

It’s not hard to envision the government going to extremes to get around the rule of law. They’ve done it repeatedly for 18 months. Why stop now?

Don Purdum, Independent Political Analyst

Copyright 2021,