![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jan. 18th, 2013 07:53 amI try really hard to stay out of political arguments on Facebook, but sometimes I can't seem to help myself.
I've seen several memes trying to do these comparisons with drunk driving and gun control and the logic fail just breaks my brain.
One said something along the lines of 'gun control would be like making cars illegal because people get killed driving drunk' and another one was 'gun control is like making it harder for sober people to drive cars.'
The thing both these memes seem to miss is the fact that there is a crapton of regulations when it comes to driving. We need testing, licenses, there's a database where drivers can be found (at least according to all the cop shows I watch) and if you prove yourself a bad driver, you loose your right to drive.
There are also tons of laws against drink-driving, too. You get caught doing that, even if you didn't hurt anyone or anything, you are in trouble.
So using this comparison, to me, just points out how much we need regulation when it comes to guns and gun ownership.
And I don't understand why gun advocates seem to think that banning assult rifles (which no one bloody needs and no, don't give me the 'we have to protect ourselves from the government because we are nowhere NEAR a situation where our laws are going to breakdown so much we have to protect ourselves from congress using assult rifles. We have twitter now) or making more rules with fewer loopholes to keep the bad people from getting guns is the same thing as jackbooting into people's homes and stealing all their weaponry.
And then the 'oh, more people get killed by hammers than guns' thing, while patently untrue, also misses out on the bigger picture that a) it's easier to stop someone with a hammer and, b) hammers don't usually kill 20 people in a matter of minutes.
People also don't seem to understand that the people who's job it is to use guns are trained. Constantly. And they have learned how to make split-second decisions, and they've learned (hopefully) how NOT to shoot the innocent bystander. They CAN kill someone if they have to.
I don't think, or at least I hope, that the average person would hesitate before shooting someone, because the average person isn't a killer, and has a moral compass strong enough that they would not want to kill someone, and would therefore hesitate if confronted with a living human being, giving that person, who DOESN'T have a moral compass opportunity to get the gun out of Average Joe's hand and use it against him, and later someone else.
But the Gun Advocates don't think beyond 'don't take my right to have guns!!!' The bigger picture means nothing to them.
Rant over. I return you now to your regularly scheduled program.
I've seen several memes trying to do these comparisons with drunk driving and gun control and the logic fail just breaks my brain.
One said something along the lines of 'gun control would be like making cars illegal because people get killed driving drunk' and another one was 'gun control is like making it harder for sober people to drive cars.'
The thing both these memes seem to miss is the fact that there is a crapton of regulations when it comes to driving. We need testing, licenses, there's a database where drivers can be found (at least according to all the cop shows I watch) and if you prove yourself a bad driver, you loose your right to drive.
There are also tons of laws against drink-driving, too. You get caught doing that, even if you didn't hurt anyone or anything, you are in trouble.
So using this comparison, to me, just points out how much we need regulation when it comes to guns and gun ownership.
And I don't understand why gun advocates seem to think that banning assult rifles (which no one bloody needs and no, don't give me the 'we have to protect ourselves from the government because we are nowhere NEAR a situation where our laws are going to breakdown so much we have to protect ourselves from congress using assult rifles. We have twitter now) or making more rules with fewer loopholes to keep the bad people from getting guns is the same thing as jackbooting into people's homes and stealing all their weaponry.
And then the 'oh, more people get killed by hammers than guns' thing, while patently untrue, also misses out on the bigger picture that a) it's easier to stop someone with a hammer and, b) hammers don't usually kill 20 people in a matter of minutes.
People also don't seem to understand that the people who's job it is to use guns are trained. Constantly. And they have learned how to make split-second decisions, and they've learned (hopefully) how NOT to shoot the innocent bystander. They CAN kill someone if they have to.
I don't think, or at least I hope, that the average person would hesitate before shooting someone, because the average person isn't a killer, and has a moral compass strong enough that they would not want to kill someone, and would therefore hesitate if confronted with a living human being, giving that person, who DOESN'T have a moral compass opportunity to get the gun out of Average Joe's hand and use it against him, and later someone else.
But the Gun Advocates don't think beyond 'don't take my right to have guns!!!' The bigger picture means nothing to them.
Rant over. I return you now to your regularly scheduled program.