It has happened again.

[-gg-]

No, but it IS a completely different issue.

it is?

People get drunk and drive, then kill people. Why don't we ban alcohol? Would be an easy fix to the problem, wouldn't it?

Or could it be that people will still drink and drive and it doesn't matter if alcohol were illegal or not. A criminal is a criminal. They don't care about laws.

[Dadtallica]

it is?

People get drunk and drive, then kill people. Why don't we ban alcohol? Would be an easy fix to the problem, wouldn't it?

Or could it be that people will still drink and drive and it doesn't matter if alcohol were illegal or not. A criminal is a criminal. They don't care about laws.

This is one of my favorites…

Then why have them at all?

[Nefarious]

btw why not arm the custodians and the cafeteria lady.

[Arlo]

it is?

People get drunk and drive, then kill people. Why don't we ban alcohol? Would be an easy fix to the problem, wouldn't it?

Or could it be that people will still drink and drive and it doesn't matter if alcohol were illegal or not. A criminal is a criminal. They don't care about laws.

But there are laws and drunk drivers are punished and that does drop the driver mortality rate. You never really make a good argument regarding this issue. But then, I never expect you to ... so ... *ShruG*

[Dadtallica]

A car is the most regulated thing on the planet. Where are some of your flags of tyranny when you have to go renew that drivers license?

Nevermind… I’m going to do myself a favor and disengage… 

[guncrasher]

it is?

People get drunk and drive, then kill people. Why don't we ban alcohol? Would be an easy fix to the problem, wouldn't it?

Or could it be that people will still drink and drive and it doesn't matter if alcohol were illegal or not. A criminal is a criminal. They don't care about laws.

think you mean ban cars. if there's no alcohol there's still seizures, diabetes and legally prescribed drugs for different illnesses.


semp

[-gg-]

But there are laws and drunk drivers are punished and that does drop the driver mortality rate. You never really make a good argument regarding this issue. But then, I never expect you to ... so ... *ShruG*

there are laws about shooting people too. Shooters get punished.

owning a gun is a constitutional right. Driving is not a right and neither is drinking.

[Arlo]

there are laws about shooting people too. Shooters get punished.

owning a gun is a constitutional right. Driving is not a right and neither is drinking.

Regulating guns is clearly stated, -tt-.

[-gg-]

why is there never an outcry to ban alcohol when a drunk kills a busload of kids? Drunk drivers kill lots of people and you never hear anyone calling for bans on alcohol or bars.

I want background checks on people before they can buy a drink in bars. We need to regulate alcohol. Nobody needs anything with a higher alcohol content than .005%

[Arlo]

Too broad a rant. Nobody is actually calling for the banning of all guns - just the most frequently used ones in mass shootings. So now, which alcohol do you want to ban? Might I suggest working on your rant a bit more before clinging to it and thinking it's the pov of genius? 

[guncrasher]

there are laws about shooting people too. Shooters get punished.

owning a gun is a constitutional right. Driving is not a right and neither is drinking.

alcohol took a constitutional amendment to ban it and 1 to bring it back.  you could argue it is



semp

[Busher]

IN before the lock, but I often wonder if Jimmy Madison looks down (or up) and wonders "wtf did I do?"

[Meatwad]

why is there never an outcry to ban alcohol when a drunk kills a busload of kids? Drunk drivers kill lots of people and you never hear anyone calling for bans on alcohol or bars.

I want background checks on people before they can buy a drink in bars. We need to regulate alcohol. Nobody needs anything with a higher alcohol content than .005%

Will never happen. The governments tax the hell out of alcohol so if you banned that, that would be a lot of money missing out of their pockets. Its easier for certain groups to twist words on the boom stick boogeyman about how some inanimate object gains sentient and shoots someone and needs banned rather then say the shooter was a mentally nuts nutjob that should of been locked in a mental institution years ago rather then allowed to roam the streets. Would happen less if you had to be medically cleared by a psychologist that you were mentally sound and fit to own and operate a firearm. But also  that does not prevent certain groups to get illegal stolen guns and commit crimes (see chicago, detroit, etc)

[Arlo]

Seems MW is for increasing taxes on gun sales in order to make them ban proof (though it already seems the NRA has achieved that without resorting to such)*. 

*I might have his intent wong but then it may be unintentional on his part.

[1Cane]

So when it comes out this was a transgender will they ban TRANSGENDERS?