President Joe Biden will announce the creation of the first-ever federal office of gun violence prevention on Friday, fulfilling a key demand of gun safety activists as legislation remains stalled in Congress, according to two people with direct knowledge of the White House’s plans.

Stefanie Feldman, a longtime Biden aide who previously worked on the Domestic Policy Council, will play a leading role, the people said.

Greg Jackson, executive director of the Community Justice Action Fund, and Rob Wilcox, the senior director for federal government affairs at Everytown for Gun Safety, are expected to hold key roles in the office alongside Feldman, who has worked on gun policy for more than a decade and still oversees the policy portfolio at the White House. The creation of the office was first reported by The Washington Post.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think you’re missing the point: the analogy of medical to commodity doesn’t work at all because medical decisions have built in gatekeepers

    I would be all for a law where in order to buy a new gun you had to sit down with somebody who asked you why you wanted to have a gun and even just like handed you a pamplet with statistical gun ownership risks. That’s literally a wing of gun control legislation: background checks, licensing, mental health screening, etc would be the analog of the doctor, referal, etc in the comparison, but it doesn’t exist.

    But post 1980s NRA interepretation of the 2nd amendment in the US is as a right to purchase them as a commodity. Abortion is a wholly different thing where a medical professional guides somebody through a process with risks that must be stated and evaluated.

    Comparing a commodity model to a medical process just undermines whatever point you think you’re trying to make.

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Comparing a commodity model to a medical process just undermines whatever point you think you’re trying to make.

      This is irrelevant. If it makes the point incomprehensible to you, fair enough… But that doesn’t mean that there’s not a point you’re not getting.