Alcohol Deaths Outnumber Firearm Murders, So Should We Bring Back Prohibition?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 09:45:34 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Alcohol Deaths Outnumber Firearm Murders, So Should We Bring Back Prohibition?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Alcohol Deaths Outnumber Firearm Murders, So Should We Bring Back Prohibition?  (Read 4165 times)
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 21, 2013, 08:27:06 AM »
« edited: February 21, 2013, 08:33:13 AM by Politico »

10,228 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes in 2010.

8,775 people were murdered by firearms in 2010. *

At this rate, are liberals going to start calling for the return of prohibition and/or "automobile control"?

* - Unable to verify how many of these deaths involved alcohol/drugs either directly (i.e., murderer was under the influence) or indirectly (i.e., gang-related disputes over drugs).

Sources:

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2013, 09:11:20 AM »

Stop trolling. The two aren't comparable and you know it. We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

I'm fine with the right to bear arms, but arguments like this are stupid and do not help.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2013, 09:31:51 AM »

All anybody is asking for is proper regulations of guns. As we know, alcohol is heavily regulated and dui's are cracked down on pretty hard in most areas of the country.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2013, 05:50:27 PM »

I would say this is weak, but is it really necessary?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,890
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2013, 09:40:21 PM »

Strawman is a strawman.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2013, 10:23:12 PM »


There is a man made of straw in the Wizard of Oz. He had no brain.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 21, 2013, 10:41:15 PM »

Not only this, but there are far more firearm deaths than are suggested here. Suicides far outnumber murders, of course. But that's far too taboo to talk about in America. Roll Eyes
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2013, 11:32:28 PM »

And there are vast amounts of accidental deaths, accidental injuries and intentional injuries to go along with those suicides as well. But you know, joke thread deserves joke responses, so let's not get too carried away with reality. Tongue
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2013, 01:33:33 AM »
« Edited: February 23, 2013, 01:36:58 AM by Politico »

Liberals do not have a leg to stand on with respect to gun control. Most incidents of improper firearm use involve alcohol/drugs in some capacity. Prohibition of alcohol/drugs clearly does not work, so why would prohibition of firearms be any different?

The best we can do is better help the mentally ill, and raise awareness about what drugs/alcohol can lead to if one does not watch it.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2013, 01:34:51 AM »

Not only this, but there are far more firearm deaths than are suggested here. Suicides far outnumber murders, of course. But that's far too taboo to talk about in America. Roll Eyes

And how many suicides have absolutely no association whatsoever with drugs (illicit and/or prescription alike) and/or alcohol?

Come on...
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2013, 01:36:25 AM »

We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

Why would prohibition on firearms be different?
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2013, 08:44:18 AM »

We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

Why would prohibition on firearms be different?

One is a consumable good and the other is a durable one, which obviously affects how often consumers buy the product. This affects the model of demand, as consumers will repeatedly buy one and only buy the other in a limited fashion. Additionally, one is easy to make, requires common materials, and only a little know how (to the point that people can make it at home without too much effort, if they are so inclined, which many were during prohibition) while the other requires specialized manufacturing equipment, materials, and knowledge to produce. These factors make one far more lucrative than the other, and as such you'd see a far bigger black market for alcohol than guns. These are the same reasons we the war on drugs is an utter failure and yet we are mostly able to enforce the ban on automatic weapons.
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2013, 10:31:29 AM »

I'm just going to come out and say it without sugarcoating things. 

Cars are killing machines.  No matter how much you like them or find them indispensable, they just are.  They kill people, they kill cities, they kill the climate, they kill the millions of years of stored fossil energy we've been living high on for the past century (and may not be able to rely on much longer).

It is a matter of grave public importance that we make the automobile less popular, and less prevalent, and less necessary.  Our very civilization depends on it.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2013, 11:21:02 AM »

We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

Why would prohibition on firearms be different?

One is a consumable good and the other is a durable one, which obviously affects how often consumers buy the product. This affects the model of demand, as consumers will repeatedly buy one and only buy the other in a limited fashion. Additionally, one is easy to make, requires common materials, and only a little know how (to the point that people can make it at home without too much effort, if they are so inclined, which many were during prohibition) while the other requires specialized manufacturing equipment, materials, and knowledge to produce. These factors make one far more lucrative than the other, and as such you'd see a far bigger black market for alcohol than guns. These are the same reasons we the war on drugs is an utter failure and yet we are mostly able to enforce the ban on automatic weapons.

All of this goes out the window because you've not accounted for the fact that we already have more firearms than people in the country, and most of these firearms can last well over 100 years if properly maintained.

Also, it sounds like Star Trek, but 3D printing is going to make the creation of some durable goods, even guns, much easier.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,130
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 23, 2013, 11:29:04 AM »

We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

Why would prohibition on firearms be different?

One is a consumable good and the other is a durable one, which obviously affects how often consumers buy the product. This affects the model of demand, as consumers will repeatedly buy one and only buy the other in a limited fashion. Additionally, one is easy to make, requires common materials, and only a little know how (to the point that people can make it at home without too much effort, if they are so inclined, which many were during prohibition) while the other requires specialized manufacturing equipment, materials, and knowledge to produce. These factors make one far more lucrative than the other, and as such you'd see a far bigger black market for alcohol than guns. These are the same reasons we the war on drugs is an utter failure and yet we are mostly able to enforce the ban on automatic weapons.

All of this goes out the window because you've not accounted for the fact that we already have more firearms than people in the country, and most of these firearms can last well over 100 years if properly maintained.

Also, it sounds like Star Trek, but 3D printing is going to make the creation of some durable goods, even guns, much easier.

Doesn't change the fact that alcohol is much easier to manufacture than firearms.  Also, 3D printed guns are quite primitive in their current state of development, and I wouldn't dismiss the idea of some governments passing 3D printing restrictions in the future.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2013, 12:28:15 PM »

All of this goes out the window because you've not accounted for the fact that we already have more firearms than people in the country, and most of these firearms can last well over 100 years if properly maintained.

The problem you posit here is primarily one that only applies to a ban at the start of it. Presumably any prohibition on guns would involve confiscating the existing ones. I would expect some violent resistance, but the vast majority of people will just hand them over to avoid trouble. Long term it would be much more viable - just look at other countries that have high restrictions on gun ownership.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

As was pointed out 3D printed guns are at this time are primitive. The materials available for 3D printing are not sufficiently strong to produce a durable weapon - example. Even if quality materials were available, the high end 3d printers that could use them are extremely expensive (tens of thousands of dollars) and sold/leased by a very limited number of companies, and as such it would be easy to trace who has those printers and keep tabs on them. Additionally you won't be able to get materials from just anywhere, and government regulation could keep track of orders for materials that could be used for such purposes. There's also again the matter that 3d printing will require technical expertise that most people just won't be able to get.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2013, 12:31:32 PM »

I'm just going to come out and say it without sugarcoating things. 

Cars are killing machines.  No matter how much you like them or find them indispensable, they just are.  They kill people, they kill cities, they kill the climate, they kill the millions of years of stored fossil energy we've been living high on for the past century (and may not be able to rely on much longer).

It is a matter of grave public importance that we make the automobile less popular, and less prevalent, and less necessary.  Our very civilization depends on it.

Testify!
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2013, 12:46:50 PM »

As was pointed out 3D printed guns are at this time are primitive. The materials available for 3D printing are not sufficiently strong to produce a durable weapon - example. Even if quality materials were available, the high end 3d printers that could use them are extremely expensive (tens of thousands of dollars) and sold/leased by a very limited number of companies, and as such it would be easy to trace who has those printers and keep tabs on them. Additionally you won't be able to get materials from just anywhere, and government regulation could keep track of orders for materials that could be used for such purposes. There's also again the matter that 3d printing will require technical expertise that most people just won't be able to get.

I generally agree with your points except for the last.  It would require that expertise to come up with the plans in the first place, but once developed and released, they'd be easy for anyone to use.  That's one of the attractions of 3D printing after all.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2013, 01:39:46 PM »

All of this goes out the window because you've not accounted for the fact that we already have more firearms than people in the country, and most of these firearms can last well over 100 years if properly maintained.

The problem you posit here is primarily one that only applies to a ban at the start of it. Presumably any prohibition on guns would involve confiscating the existing ones. I would expect some violent resistance, but the vast majority of people will just hand them over to avoid trouble.

God no. If the federal government tried that, many state governments would start arresting federal agents who try to enforce such legislation. It would be a civil war. The point is moot because the federal government is headed towards massive cuts to avoid defaulting; they do not have the resources to attempt to confiscate over 300 million firearms across the country.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

LCD TVs were primitive in 1999, too. Technology advances rapidly. 3D printing has the potential to dramatically transform the global economy.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

People said the same about computers thirty, if not twenty, years ago.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,166
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2013, 03:11:15 PM »

Regardless of the state of any other gun control laws, it's almost certainly going to have to be illegal to 3D-print guns once 3D-printing becomes widespread.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 23, 2013, 03:26:38 PM »

Regardless of the state of any other gun control laws, it's almost certainly going to have to be illegal to 3D-print guns once 3D-printing becomes widespread.

How do you enforce such a law?
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2013, 04:03:45 PM »

Not only this, but there are far more firearm deaths than are suggested here. Suicides far outnumber murders, of course. But that's far too taboo to talk about in America. Roll Eyes



Mass Murder Suicide Pills
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2013, 04:41:58 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2013, 04:47:29 PM by Politico »

Even prescription pain killers are associated with more accidental deaths than guns:

"Prescription painkiller overdoses killed nearly 15,000 people in the US in 2008. This is more than 3 times the 4,000 people killed by these drugs in 1999."

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/painkilleroverdoses/?mobile=nocontent

Liberal logic says adults are not responsible enough to properly use pain killers, just like guns, so we need to ban both!

America has a problem with prescription medications and mental illness, not firearms. In fact, I am going to go so far as to say the primary cause of everything being so screwed up today is prescription medications. The first step to recovery is admitting there is a problem.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2013, 06:59:23 PM »

So, sum up your entire point in one sentence. That because people also have accidents with other things, deadly weapons should be completely left alone? What kind of weak-ass argument is that? You'd think our propensities towards drug and alcohol abuse would be an argument for more gun control. I mean, come on, at least try...
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 23, 2013, 07:07:16 PM »

So, sum up your entire point in one sentence. That because people also have accidents with other things, deadly weapons should be completely left alone? What kind of weak-ass argument is that? You'd think our propensities towards drug and alcohol abuse would be an argument for more gun control. I mean, come on, at least try...

The argument is that drug/alcohol use are the root cause of most firearm murders/accidents/suicides. We do not restrict automobile usage simply because drunk drivers kill people with automobiles. Likewise, we should not restrict firearm ownership simply because some drunks/drug users kill people, including themselves, with firearms.

More people die from accidental overdoses ON PAIN KILLERS ALONE than the total number of firearm murders AND accidents, so why is the presence of firearm accidents/murders used as an argument for gun control?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 11 queries.