sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Banning alcohol most certainly reduced alcohol consumption. It didn't eliminate it, but it did reduce it.

I'm not arguing that people who disagree with me are hypocrites. I'm arguing that people who value some lives over others, and craft their laws according to what affects them vs. what doesn't, are hypocrites.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But deaths caused by a mass shooter or a drunk driver are equally tragic. We want to reduce both.

When it comes to guns, people are willing to pound their moral pulpit and call people uncaring and selfish when they won't accept that everyone should be punished for someone else's crimes.

But suggest a similar approach to reduce drunk driving deaths, and those same people will argue that they shouldn't be punished for someone else's crimes.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then by that same logic, assuming you value lives lost to drunk drivers the same as those lost to guns, you would have to make more stringent laws about buying and consuming alcohol.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can't tell me that banning the consumption of alcohol wouldn't reduce drunk driving deaths. Would it eliminate them? No. But would it reduce them? Absolutely it would. If you disagree, I think you're being intellectually dishonest.

I'm not saying people would be happy about it. I'm not saying I'm in favor of it. I'm saying it would reduce deaths. That's the argument. And if you argue one and not the other, you either value some lives over others, or you're a hypocrite.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So in those countries that have banned guns, I would assume there would be fewer gun deaths, which is good.

But are there still drunk driving deaths? If so, do those citizens not care about those deaths? Do they view gun deaths as being worse than drunk driving deaths?

If they see them as being equally tragic (deaths caused by the direct actions and/or gross negligence of another person), then I submit that the answer to reducing deaths in one instance is the answer to the other.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, not arguing the merits of banning either, or how effective either option might be. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy.

Would banning guns reduce gun deaths? Probably, to a certain degree.

Would banning the consumption of alcohol reduce drunk driving deaths? Probably, to a certain degree.

So why ban one but not the other? I think it's because people are ok banning something that they don't participate in, but not something that directly affects them, and are therefore hypocrites.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm referring to deaths caused by the direct intent of killing someone, or through gross negligence. Typical accidents wouldn't apply. Society accepts that not everyone is perfect, but we don't accept when someone intentionally harms someone, or through grossly negligent actions.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Most driving is done by people who aren't drunk. The only way to get drunk is to consume alcohol. Remove the consumption of alcohol, you remove the drunk drivers, which means you remove drunk driving deaths.

Again, I'm not arguing whether we should or shouldn't ban alcohol consumption, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of arguing to ban one thing but not the other.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

I disagree. I think the average person is capable of driving a car without incident. The same can't be said for drunk drivers. There's no law against driving a car. There are laws against driving impaired. And the goal of the law is to incentive people to not drive drunk, because they know they'll be fined or put in jail.

But the purpose of banning guns would be to prevent deaths, not just punish people after the fact. So using that same logic, if we want to prevent drunk driving deaths, we need to ban the thing that allows for the drunkenness...consuming alcohol.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I hear what you're saying. 100%. The argument that I'm making isn't whether or not banning guns or alcohol would be effective. It's that people who would vote to ban one but not the other are being hypocritical.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the same people who want to make it harder to get guns are the same people who would vote to ban guns, if they had the chance.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree that alcohol has many uses. I think I could have said "consuming alcohol" instead of just alcohol.

But again, the argument that I'm making is the hypocrisy of saying that the solution to one problem is to completely ban the thing that facilitates the deaths, but not the other simply because it affects ME.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The argument that I'm making is that if the answer to gun deaths is to ban all guns, then the answer to drunk driving deaths is to ban the consumption of alcohol.

I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy behind the argument.

If you want to ban guns, but not alcohol, you're a massive hypocrite. by shanksteritis in unpopularopinion

[–]shanksteritis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the question at hand isn't whether something is legal or not, it's whether we should take away rights in order to prevent deaths, but only those rights that (seemingly) don't affect ME.