charon
Member
This is an argument I use regularly in a general gun control sense. Just used it today in the online response portion of a Tribune article on a DUI that killed 4 people (comparable to the NIU toll), noting that at the Trib, some homicides seem to be more equal than others.
There is usually a very similar correlation to the death figures from alcohol and firearms. In fact, moving beyond DUIs to death form organ failure, etc. The odds can be even greater. Cutting out firearm suicide figures from the figure expands it even more...but... alcohol also plays a roll in many suicides so that is likely a wash.
The general argument is that the death toll is entirely comparable, the impact on society and "the children" comparable and if anything much more heavily weighted towards alcohol. Most firearm homicide involves two criminals -- shooter and victim. Alcohol is much more broad -- the previously law abiding receptionist with one too many jello shots kills the sober blue collar dad on his way to work. Alcohol is even a privilege and not a right.
So, the argument continues, if you are outraged at "gun violence" you must be equally outraged at alcohol violence and want a similar treatment of the issue. If not, you must be a hypocrite. Followed by, "Not that I'm personally against the consumption of alcohol or want generic alcohol control -- banning the sale in bars and restaurants, etc. Rather, they should both be treated as alcohol currently is -- if you misuse it you, the individual, are held responsible."
I conclude by noting that I have lost 3 friends to alcohol and not a single one to a firearm.
If presented properly it really takes the wind out of the sails of most gun control activists who like to have a drink or two. It especially works on our European friends. "Well, now that you got the whole guns thing under control, isn't it time to start regulating the pub? Think of the children!"
There is usually a very similar correlation to the death figures from alcohol and firearms. In fact, moving beyond DUIs to death form organ failure, etc. The odds can be even greater. Cutting out firearm suicide figures from the figure expands it even more...but... alcohol also plays a roll in many suicides so that is likely a wash.
The general argument is that the death toll is entirely comparable, the impact on society and "the children" comparable and if anything much more heavily weighted towards alcohol. Most firearm homicide involves two criminals -- shooter and victim. Alcohol is much more broad -- the previously law abiding receptionist with one too many jello shots kills the sober blue collar dad on his way to work. Alcohol is even a privilege and not a right.
So, the argument continues, if you are outraged at "gun violence" you must be equally outraged at alcohol violence and want a similar treatment of the issue. If not, you must be a hypocrite. Followed by, "Not that I'm personally against the consumption of alcohol or want generic alcohol control -- banning the sale in bars and restaurants, etc. Rather, they should both be treated as alcohol currently is -- if you misuse it you, the individual, are held responsible."
I conclude by noting that I have lost 3 friends to alcohol and not a single one to a firearm.
If presented properly it really takes the wind out of the sails of most gun control activists who like to have a drink or two. It especially works on our European friends. "Well, now that you got the whole guns thing under control, isn't it time to start regulating the pub? Think of the children!"
