arguing gun control...an analogy used


PDA






SSN Vet
August 7, 2007, 01:56 PM
I posted this as a reply on another thread but was so happy with it that I thougt it might be worthy of it's own.

Mods....if it's to political feel free to send it to the electronic circular file.

-----------------

After the VA Tech. slaughter, I had some lively discussions with a co-worker who is very scared of guns (and thus pretty solidly anti-gun). I used an analogy of the war on drugs with gun control that went something like so.....

The "war on drugs" has gone on for a long time with a LOT of $ and manpower thrown at the problem. Yet there're still many, many folks out their with bags of pot the size of your palm in their pockets, glove boxes and end table drawers. So the question arises, are these type of laws able to be enforced to such an extent that you have such a thing as a "drug free school zone"?

Now a handgun is about the size of the palm of your hand....there are millions of them out there....and they can be had for relatively short money.

So given the "success" of the enforcement on laws that totally ban pot, how successful is a total ban on guns going to be? And what level of police intrusion into your private life and space will be required to enforce such a total gun ban (let alone money and manpower).

Now if the police fail to 100% enforce the laws that ban pot, what are the consequences? Law breakers will still get pot....and they'll still get stoned...and many will still turn to harder drugs....and many may commit crimes against law abiding citizens to fund their habits, and many will cause terrible accidents with innocent victims. Law abiding citizens will not have pot and will largely (accept for the victims of crime and negligence) live their life as normal.

Now if the police fail to enforce a 100% ban on guns what are the consequences? Law breakers will still get guns and they'll still use guns in crimes....BUT....they'll do so with greater boldness, knowing all of their law abiding victims will be unarmed. And all the good dubbies out their will no longer have the best tools available to protect they're property and lives.

So people are out there calling for the government to ban guns every day. But these gun bans are not likely to be 100% enforceable. If they are not 100% enforced, they will put honest people in serious jeopardy. And if the government attempted to seriously enforce them, it would require a huge infringement on everyone’s liberties.

Such total ban gun control makes no sense at all because it is un-enforceable, would require huge infringement on personal liberties, and would empower criminals while making law abiders very vulnerable. Not to mention a serious conflict with a little known thing called the Constitution of the United States of America, which is the supposed to be THE law of the law.

If you want to live in a free society ya got to make allowance for people to have a little fundamental freedom. Living in fear of tyranny isn't exactly freedom....whether it's that of armed criminal gangs or a Gestopo style police state.

For cryin’ out loud....the government tried to "infringe liberties" by tapping international phone calls into the U.S.A. in the name of protecting it's citizenry from the very real threat of terrorism and everyone screamed bloody murder. Just what the heck are they gonna say when the police show up to search every home and car on the block for illegal guns, followed that night by criminal gangs of home invaders, rapist and murderers?

-----

disclaimor...

I do not advocate for the legalization of pot.
I generaly support law enforcement and officers of the law.
I have no problem with the NSA tapping my phone call should any one from mountains of Afganastan call me on a cell phone.

If you enjoyed reading about "arguing gun control...an analogy used" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Tin Gizel
August 7, 2007, 02:52 PM
i hear ya man, but you're trying to reason with people that DON'T WANT to get it....

glummer
August 7, 2007, 04:08 PM
So given the "success" of the enforcement on laws that totally ban pot, how successful is a total ban on guns going to be?
Very successful, in the case of law-abiding gun-owners. Which is what really counts. :neener:
And what level of police intrusion into your private life and space will be required to enforce such a total gun ban (let alone money and manpower).
I have nothing to hide, so they won’t bother me. :neener:
And all the good dubbies out their will no longer have the best tools available to protect they're property and lives.
Serves them right, for thinking they’re better than the rest of us. :neener:
And if the government attempted to seriously enforce them, it would require a huge infringement on everyone’s liberties.
Not mine. I have nothing to hide. :neener:
Not to mention a serious conflict with a little known thing called the Constitution of the United States of America, which is the supposed to be THE law of the law.
“Collective Right!”, “Collective Right!”, “Collective Right!” :neener::neener:
For cryin’ out loud....the government tried to "infringe liberties" by tapping international phone calls into the U.S.A. in the name of protecting it's citizenry from the very real threat of terrorism and everyone screamed bloody murder.
And Congress legalized it just this week. :D

erict
August 7, 2007, 05:09 PM
It would be like the prohibition era and we all know how that made things sooooo much better. :barf:

El Tejon
August 7, 2007, 05:15 PM
SSN, didn't Dave Kopel use a variation of this argument in the late 1980s?

I remember reading an article wherein he compared the weight of smuggled marijuana to the weight of potentially smuggled handguns.:scrutiny:

I will look to see if this is on the net yet.

If you enjoyed reading about "arguing gun control...an analogy used" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!