Because, quite frankly, like AR vs. AK, or 9mm vs. .45 or any number of the debates that crop on this forum repeatedly, it's a dead horse that has been beaten to pulp. To say nothing of the continual rehashing of the topic on the news as spun by inflated talking heads who know about as much about basic economics as I know about calculating the relative postions of entangling electrons.
One can only put up with the same nonesensensical arguments for so long before calling them for what they are; and Chris did that more succinctly than I certainly could have.
i've only been on THR about a year, but this is the first time i've encountered this topic. sorry to bore you.
i don't mind people debating the merits of AR vs AK or 9mm vs .45. Reality is, that it's very hard to test and reach indisputable conclusions when there are so many variables (see the stopping power thread). So there are legitimate theories on both sides, and they'll remain theories. But it would be foolish to say an AR or .45acp is nonsensical.
It's the same with this topic. My argument is not only rational and supported, it's a far more widely held view. Doesn't make it "right", but it does make calling it "nonsensical" a little close minded. And I'll grant you that telling me to "grow up" is succinct, but I frankly expected better from a moderator on "the high road".
So there are flawed market externalities that are legally required, but since they're legally required, they're ok?
is that so hard to understand? take any of the examples i've offered. unless it's your contention that we should do away with patents and copyrights (plenty of people think we should, but it's not without consequences. e.g. it would lead immediately to the federal gov being the sole source for drug research), and antitrust, etc, then YES there are external influences that are required to keep our "free" market functioning.
if you think gun regulations are bad, you should try being a stock broker for a while. all the laws and regulations i have to abide by changed all sorts of things. I might think the best investment is x but be unable to offer it due to any of a hundred different reasons (some good, some stupid).
the point is the market is NOT free. and as long as it is constrained by artificial influences to the point that it breaks down, then the simplified supply/demand theories we learned in high school won't work in the real world quite like they do in the text books.