Jump to content

Alcohol kills more people than guns.

HooverOutlaw

By HooverOutlaw
in Off-Topic Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

Blueliner Proficient

Blueliner

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, HooverOutlaw said:

Why don't they stop selling all beer whiskey etc.

Why is it just guns?

Alcohol, the collateral damage of, and tobacco leave all others in the dust when it comes deaths and burden on the US taxpayer....and it’s not even close. There is NO WAY that we should change the Constitution/fabric of our country until other means/causes of death and destruction are addressed. Address some of these causes (and make headway like we mean it) and maybe I CONSIDER 2nd amendment changes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belly Bob Experienced

Belly Bob

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Blueliner said:

BB, I get it and I feel ya. But we could go ‘round and ‘round as to what can be construed as a murder weapon. No?  I agree that one less means to “murder” people with isn’t necassarily a bad thing. 

No, we can't argue that alcohol is a murder weapon.

We just can't be that stupid, can we?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belly Bob Experienced

Belly Bob

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ohio said:

Tobacco kills more people than alcohol, why not outlaw the tobacco industry first?

The issue isn't about death but about rights.

We have what is usually construed as a property right to our bodies. Just as you have the right to drive your car into the ground through neglect, because it's your car, you have the right to drink and smoke and eat poorly and  to get big and fat. It may be that you shouldn't do these things, just like you shouldn't neglect the maintenance of your car, but that's a different point.

We also have a basic right to personal safety, which is right that contains the way others may treat us.

The government's job is to protect our basic rights, not to prevent us from dying earlier than we might have if we had chosen to eat better or if we had drunk less booze or smoked fewer cigarettes or exercised more.

The question is whether the current laws and policies governing the use of guns constitutes a violation of people's right to personal safety. 

The right to bear arms in the first place is usually construed as an entailment of the right to personal safety against those who might threaten us with violence. 

But it's an empirical question whether the right to bear arms serves that purpose. The Wild West and the hill tribes of Afghanistan might prove that when guns are widely available to people, people are made less safe from attacks on their personal safety, not more safe. 

And if that's true, then the government isn't doing its job, if it's not protecting people's right to personal safety.

So the fact that booze and tobacco kills more people than guns is completely irrelevant. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ohio Newbie

ohio

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

The issue isn't about death but about rights.

We have what is usually construed as a property right to our bodies. Just as you have the right to drive your car into the ground through neglect, because it's your car, you have the right to drink and smoke and eat poorly and  to get big and fat. It may be that you shouldn't do these things, just like you shouldn't neglect the maintenance of your car, but that's a different point.

We also have a basic right to personal safety, which is right that contains the way others may treat us.

The government's job is to protect our basic rights, not to prevent us from dying earlier than we might have if we had chosen to eat better or if had drunk less or smoked less or exercised more.

The question is whether the current laws and policies governing the use of guns constitutes a violation of people's right to personal safety. 

The right to bear arms in the first place is usually construed as an entailment of the right to personal safety against those who might threaten us with violence. 

But it's an empirical question whether the right to bear arms serves that purpose. The Wild West and the hill tribes of Afghanistan might prove that when guns are widely available to people, people are made less safe from attacks on their personal safety, not more safe. 

And if that's true, then the government isn't doing its job, if it's not protecting people's right to personal safety.

So the fact that booze and tobacco kills more people than guns is completely irrelevant. 

Very true.

What the alt-right does not understand is that the Gun and Gun Ammo industry gives perks to the top brass of organizations like the NRA. The NRA brass then funds politicians campaigns to keep them from imposing tighter gun laws in place, thus reducing the top and bottom line, and these politicians have influence on the right wing media who brainwashes the alt-right viewers.  So the gun industry gets paid, the NRA brass gets paid, the politicians, and the media employees get paid.  However, society suffers.  Why do you think that the NRA is in favor of more guns in schools for security reasons?  But not for outlawing unnecessary bump fire stocks.  Hint think, fiscally.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belly Bob Experienced

Belly Bob

Posted
Posted
Just now, ohio said:

Very true.

What the alt-right does not understand is that the Gun and Gun Ammo industry gives perks to the top brass of organizations like the NRA. The NRA brass then funds politicians campaigns to keep them from putting tight imposing tighter gun laws in place, thus reducing the top and bottom line, and these politicians have influence on the right wing media who brainwashes the alt-right viewers.  So the gun industry gets paid, the NRA brass gets paid, the politicians, and the media employees get paid.  Why do you think that the NRA is in favor of more guns in schools for security reasons?  But not for outlawing unnecessary bump fire stocks.  Hint think, fiscally.

Interesting.

I've never heard any of that before, but it rings true. 

Still, even if it is true, it doesn't tell us whether we should have more or fewer or the same restrictions on guns, although I don't think that was your point anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ohio Newbie

ohio

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

Interesting.

I've never heard any of that before, but it rings true. 

Still, even if it is true, it doesn't tell us whether we should have more or fewer or the same restrictions on guns, although I don't think that was your point anyway. 

The goal of the NRA should be to protect the 2nd Amendment, to teach proper use to weapons, and to keep guns from people who should not have them.  However, the last two would reduce gun sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorCalRuss Newbie

NorCalRuss

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, ohio said:

Very true.

What the alt-right does not understand is that the Gun and Gun Ammo industry gives perks to the top brass of organizations like the NRA. The NRA brass then funds politicians campaigns to keep them from imposing tighter gun laws in place, thus reducing the top and bottom line, and these politicians have influence on the right wing media who brainwashes the alt-right viewers.  So the gun industry gets paid, the NRA brass gets paid, the politicians, and the media employees get paid.  However, society suffers.  Why do you think that the NRA is in favor of more guns in schools for security reasons?  But not for outlawing unnecessary bump fire stocks.  Hint think, fiscally.

What’s your take on planned parenthood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blueliner Proficient

Blueliner

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Belly Bob said:

No, we can't argue that alcohol is a murder weapon.

We just can't be that stupid, can we?

No we can’t. But I’m also not sayin that alcohol is a murder weapon....per se. But I am saying, playing devils advocate, is that alcohol and it’s collateral damage dwarfs gun related deaths by about a million miles. Not even an argument. We KNOW it kills, creates huge burdens on our medical institution, and yet it’s not even close to a talking point for the left. Until these points are addressed (and progress made) the 2nd amendment will live on. At least the tobacco industry is being deservedly atttacked. 

This is what I don’t get....from both sides. One sided proclamations witthout compromise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...