Quote:
Originally Posted by Yanks_Todd
Alcohol is designed to be consumed in moderation responsibly. Absolut does not bottle vodka for you to Amy Winehouse it. Why? Because they lose a customer if you do. An AR-15 with a 30rd or 100rd clip if used AS DESIGNED is meant to dispense 30 or 100 bullets as fast as you can pull the trigger. Those bullets are not intended for deer or targets, they are intended for humans. It's that simple.
Self-inflicted? alcohol Homicide? guns The harm to society cannot be compared like that. If I drink myself to death, so what? If I shoot people at the mall that is an issue.
If you have $1000 cash and go to a gun show it is no harder then you having $20 and going to the grocery store. Comparing a consumable product to a discretionary one is impossible.
Then why not shoot with rubber bullets? Why does the projectile have to be deadly for you to prove you can aim? Why do you need 30rd or 100rds at the range? To answer you question I would say you going to the gun range and shooting and you drinking Vodka at home are both 99.99% safe. What is your point?
No, I think it pretty much has to do with not having your 5 year old shot at school dude. I want to stop your fun???, seriously, that was weak. This is an emotional argument, but it has nothing to do with me limiting your fun factor.
Ok, I don't think that all gun peeps are hicks. Not at all. On a note I worked for the NRA for a year, so I have some pretty deep insight into this.
BTW, I am ok with CCW and I don't have a problem with hand guns, I have a problem with large capacity clips and loopholes in gun registration. I understand that banning "assault weapons" is really just take scary looking guns out of the equation. However it also begins to change the Rambo culture of this country which is half the problem in my opinion.
Keep reasonable guns in reasonable people's hands.
|
I give you kudos for attempting make a rationale argument, but it fails on many levels.
First, you say alcohol is designed to be used in moderation. Huh??? You do realize that alcohol and tobacco companies fought hard against any legislation that required disclosures regarding the negative impact of consuming tobacco and alcohol products, even in excess or when pregnant. And have you seen a bud light commercial recently? They promote "moderate" drinking? Are you really going to tell me that the 2 point font on the bottom of beer commercials that say, "drink responsibly" shows the true motivation of alcohol executives. Or what about malt liquor billboards plastered all over poor neighborhoods in this country. Come on now, alcohol executives are more deplorable then gun company executives IMHO, and it isn't even close.
As for "harm on society", alcohol destroys families and is one of the leading causes of automobile accidents, rapes, assaults, felony crimes and property damage. Alcoholism is also often passed down from generation to generation. If a 5 year old is ran over by a drunk driver, how is that any different than a death by gun? Dead is dead. And then the social cost on health care and police departments due to alcohol abuse is huge.
As for the "use rubber bullets" arguments that like non-alcoholic beer. People enjoy shooting a high powered gun because it is dangerous. That is the allure. Listen, I think sky diving is crazy, but I'm not going to pass judgement on people who enjoy it.
The fact of the matter is that banning large clips "feels good", but it isn't going to solve anything. Why? Because there are literally millions of large clips in the marketplace already. Have we not learned from alcohol prohibition. You CANNOT ban a cheap commodity that is in high demand by the public. It is impossible. If you do, all that happens is (a) a black market arises and (b) civil unrest by the populace that wants the commodity.
I agree with background checks, waiting periods and closing gun show loopholes. But outright bans are just so stupid and it is shocking to hear educated people argue that this will even remotely solve the "problem." Add on top of that the insane hypocracy in stating the "what about the children" defense when alcohol destroys and maims more than guns by a long shot, with less redeeming qualities (and regardless of your opinion of the second amendment, we can all agree that there isn't anything in the constitution about the right to drink alcohol).