3 ms·
> I don't see counterarguments Probably because you aren't interested in a discussion. > Unchecked gun ownership leads to loss of life at a shocking scale. T
by jack9 10y ago
> I don't see counterarguments
Probably because you aren't interested in a discussion.
> Unchecked gun ownership leads to loss of life at a shocking scale.
The tendency toward loss of life is known and acceptable, much like the cost of having vehicles. You think it's a shocking scale and I think it's marginal. Vehicle deaths still outpace in the US, so your bias is transparent.
- extra88 10y agoMotor vehicle deaths have now dropped top the point that they're about even with gun deaths. [0] But I would argue that the utility of having motor vehicles far outstrips the utility of having guns carried and in the home. Maybe gun deaths could drop more if CDC and other researchers were allowed study their effects on health more and if gun safety regulations were handled more like car safety. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/17/guns-are-now-killing-as-many-people-as-cars-in-the-u-s/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/17/guns-...
- kennywinker 10y ago> Probably because you aren't interested in a discussion. What makes you say that? Why would I delve into comment threads if I wasn't interested in a discussion. > your bias is transparent I also strongly believe cars should be heavily regulated. Lucky for us all, they are. I'm down for more regulation, if well thought out, to continue to bring this number down.