5 ms·

Political positions are almost always tribalist in nature and not based on rational analysis. Case in point: the people arguing that drug prohibition is ineffe

Political positions are almost always tribalist in nature and not based on rational analysis. Case in point: the people arguing that drug prohibition is ineffective are often the same ones arguing for gun prohibition. If prohibition doesn't work for drugs, why will it work for guns? It isn't a left or right thing, just a people thing. The same phenomenon exists in the opposite direction; guns good but drugs bad.

alphabettsy 6y ago
Are you sure they’re the same people? A good number of leftists are advocates for gun ownership with training and also support legalization of drugs. Liberals generally don’t support drug legalization, but guns and drugs really aren’t the same thing and the reasons aren’t the same either.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  If that were the case, then it wouldn't be absolutely verboten for Democrats to support gun ownership. Maybe some smaller groups of leftists or libertarians are different, but they have little actual political relevance.
  - alphabettsy 6y ago
    Can you show me the evidence that Democrats do not support gun ownership? There’s plenty of talk about restricting specific types, basically based on appearance, of weapons but haven’t seen much suggesting they’d like to ban them or make them completely unavailable as is often suggested by the right. Libertarians are not leftists and this might surprise you but sometimes political parties do things different from what many of their voters might want. Consider that very large numbers on the left voted for Bernie Sanders and support his policies, but the party had largely avoided taking them up wholeheartedly or at all.
    - ceilingcorner 6y ago
      Does anyone actually think "just some restrictions" don't inevitably snowball into more restrictions? My read is that Democrats have an overwhelming hostile position towards guns and would ban them entirely if given the political will. At best, it's a "don't talk about it" position, akin to supporting abortion and being a Republican. > this might surprise you The snark is not necessary. If you can't comment about politics without being dismissive and arrogant, don't comment at all. Bernie Sanders is for restrictions on guns. AOC is for restrictions on guns. I don't know what mainstream leftist is for widespread gun ownership. Can you suggest any? As I said in my comment, I think it's primarily a cultural thing. Left-leaning urbanites don't interact with guns, whereas right-leaning rural residents often use them for sports and hunting. While some leftist groups are for it, this is again a fringe thing that doesn't exist in real life all that much.
      - alphabettsy 6y ago
        It wasn’t meant to be dismissive or arrogant. You can’t handle a bit of jest? The slippery slope argument has been used many times to avoid making any changes at all. Maybe your read is based on propaganda? Maybe mine is? I don’t believe Democrats would ban all guns in the same way that I don’t believe fuel economy standards were intended to ban trucks as was argued by some on the right. Though there is a constitutional right to own guns where the right to drive an F150 sadly does not yet exist. Restrictions of guns does not equal banning guns and Donald Trump and Marco Rubio and many other prominent politicians on the right also favor restrictions on guns. The entire situation would be better if reasonable discussion could be had.
        ceilingcorner 6y ago
        It just seems clear to me that most Democrats have a hostile position to guns. Maybe they'd ban them, maybe they wouldn't, but if say, AOC would go shooting at the gun range or in any way signal that she likes guns, she'd be immediately criticized harshly and lose a ton of support. I don't think I'm basing this on propaganda, but I could be wrong. Personally, I don't think banning guns or having restrictions will do anything at all. The sources of gun violence are cultural and social. Figure out why mass shootings or gang warfare are so common, then address the root of the problem.
addicted 6y ago
Your case is fundamentally flawed. Just because something doesn’t work in one instance, doesn’t mean that something doesn’t work at all. But even before we get there, no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition. This entire comment thread is filled with straw men arguing against prohibition when at most people are demanding more regulation, the majority of which is supported by the majority of gun owners. Also, gun regulation works in the majority of countries with functional governance. Heck, even drug prohibition “works” wherever they really want to prohibit it (such as many Muslim countries). The problem with drug prohibition in the US is not an issue with whether it works or not, but that the cost of enforcement is too high.
- slowhand09 6y ago
  This is an outright false statement. Many legislators and many activist are in favor of an outright ban. Most know this is anon-starter. They rely on the "death of a 1000 cuts" method instead, where insignificant features are banned or restricted because "nobody cares". In my state, buying a handgun requires a 7 day waiting period. And taking an expensive and time consuming course to obtain an HQL - Handgun Qualifying License. And a background check. And the handgun has to be approved by name on a roster by the legislature.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  > no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition Seems pretty clear that this is just a political concession, in the same way that pro-life people are for more regulations on abortion. They’d really like to ban it entirely, but that is an unrealistic political non-starter, so the talking points are more compromising. > countries with functional governance Yes, well that is kind of a rare thing historically, hence the need for citizens to be able to defend themselves. Even many so called functional governments weren’t a few decades or half a century ago.
- _-david-_ 6y ago
  >But even before we get there, no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition. This is just not true. A couple days ago Senator Dianne Feinstein and Representative David Cicilline announced what they are calling an "Assault Weapons Ban" [1] DC attempted to ban handguns not too long ago and courts shot it down. [2] We have people trying to ban both handguns and rifles. If that is not a gun prohibition I don't know what is. [1] https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=0763FFE7-8E3F-4F57-B1C7-E09E161C83D7 https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-rele... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Hell...

alphabettsy 6y ago

Are you sure they’re the same people? A good number of leftists are advocates for gun ownership with training and also support legalization of drugs. Liberals generally don’t support drug legalization, but guns and drugs really aren’t the same thing and the reasons aren’t the same either.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
If that were the case, then it wouldn't be absolutely verboten for Democrats to support gun ownership. Maybe some smaller groups of leftists or libertarians are different, but they have little actual political relevance.
- alphabettsy 6y ago
  Can you show me the evidence that Democrats do not support gun ownership? There’s plenty of talk about restricting specific types, basically based on appearance, of weapons but haven’t seen much suggesting they’d like to ban them or make them completely unavailable as is often suggested by the right. Libertarians are not leftists and this might surprise you but sometimes political parties do things different from what many of their voters might want. Consider that very large numbers on the left voted for Bernie Sanders and support his policies, but the party had largely avoided taking them up wholeheartedly or at all.
  - ceilingcorner 6y ago
    Does anyone actually think "just some restrictions" don't inevitably snowball into more restrictions? My read is that Democrats have an overwhelming hostile position towards guns and would ban them entirely if given the political will. At best, it's a "don't talk about it" position, akin to supporting abortion and being a Republican. > this might surprise you The snark is not necessary. If you can't comment about politics without being dismissive and arrogant, don't comment at all. Bernie Sanders is for restrictions on guns. AOC is for restrictions on guns. I don't know what mainstream leftist is for widespread gun ownership. Can you suggest any? As I said in my comment, I think it's primarily a cultural thing. Left-leaning urbanites don't interact with guns, whereas right-leaning rural residents often use them for sports and hunting. While some leftist groups are for it, this is again a fringe thing that doesn't exist in real life all that much.
    - alphabettsy 6y ago
      It wasn’t meant to be dismissive or arrogant. You can’t handle a bit of jest? The slippery slope argument has been used many times to avoid making any changes at all. Maybe your read is based on propaganda? Maybe mine is? I don’t believe Democrats would ban all guns in the same way that I don’t believe fuel economy standards were intended to ban trucks as was argued by some on the right. Though there is a constitutional right to own guns where the right to drive an F150 sadly does not yet exist. Restrictions of guns does not equal banning guns and Donald Trump and Marco Rubio and many other prominent politicians on the right also favor restrictions on guns. The entire situation would be better if reasonable discussion could be had.
      - ceilingcorner 6y ago
        It just seems clear to me that most Democrats have a hostile position to guns. Maybe they'd ban them, maybe they wouldn't, but if say, AOC would go shooting at the gun range or in any way signal that she likes guns, she'd be immediately criticized harshly and lose a ton of support. I don't think I'm basing this on propaganda, but I could be wrong. Personally, I don't think banning guns or having restrictions will do anything at all. The sources of gun violence are cultural and social. Figure out why mass shootings or gang warfare are so common, then address the root of the problem.

addicted 6y ago

Your case is fundamentally flawed. Just because something doesn’t work in one instance, doesn’t mean that something doesn’t work at all. But even before we get there, no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition. This entire comment thread is filled with straw men arguing against prohibition when at most people are demanding more regulation, the majority of which is supported by the majority of gun owners. Also, gun regulation works in the majority of countries with functional governance. Heck, even drug prohibition “works” wherever they really want to prohibit it (such as many Muslim countries). The problem with drug prohibition in the US is not an issue with whether it works or not, but that the cost of enforcement is too high.

slowhand09 6y ago
This is an outright false statement. Many legislators and many activist are in favor of an outright ban. Most know this is anon-starter. They rely on the "death of a 1000 cuts" method instead, where insignificant features are banned or restricted because "nobody cares". In my state, buying a handgun requires a 7 day waiting period. And taking an expensive and time consuming course to obtain an HQL - Handgun Qualifying License. And a background check. And the handgun has to be approved by name on a roster by the legislature.
ceilingcorner 6y ago
> no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition Seems pretty clear that this is just a political concession, in the same way that pro-life people are for more regulations on abortion. They’d really like to ban it entirely, but that is an unrealistic political non-starter, so the talking points are more compromising. > countries with functional governance Yes, well that is kind of a rare thing historically, hence the need for citizens to be able to defend themselves. Even many so called functional governments weren’t a few decades or half a century ago.
_-david-_ 6y ago
>But even before we get there, no one in the US is even talking about gun prohibition. This is just not true. A couple days ago Senator Dianne Feinstein and Representative David Cicilline announced what they are calling an "Assault Weapons Ban" [1] DC attempted to ban handguns not too long ago and courts shot it down. [2] We have people trying to ban both handguns and rifles. If that is not a gun prohibition I don't know what is. [1] https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=0763FFE7-8E3F-4F57-B1C7-E09E161C83D7 https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-rele... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Hell...