If it was about saving lives

I would venture to say that there were many less problems with alcohol during prohibition than there were afterwards. Prohibition didn't stop all alcohol consumption, but it certainly slowed it down. That's why we have laws against recreational narcotics today.
Your view is based upon invalid assumptions and falsehoods. It is basically just an emotional appeal supporting prohibition, a failed and harmful policy demonstrated through the ages.
 
My cousin just bought his first AR, then a few weeks later somebody gave him another one as a gift. He has no plans on killing anybody or anything. They are just cool guns he's going to have fun with at the outdoor range when he has a chance to get off of work.
Guess times have changed, I NEVER bought a weapon, just to shoot targets.
I have sighted in barrel sights and scopes at the shooting range.
Generations are different, I bought guns to kill animals.
Hunting and fishing was very big, when I was a kid then again, we only had 4 channels on a black and white TV and no cell phones or computers.
 
You're FOS...........as usual.

One hundred years ago today, the Eighteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was ratified, prohibiting “intoxicating liquors” in the United States and launching the era known as Prohibition. Here are nine things you should about Prohibition and how the religiously inspired temperance movement transformed America.

1. The roots of Prohibition were planted in the pre-Civil War era. From the 1790s to the 1830s, the religious revival known as the Second Great Awakening strengthened the role of Protestant influence in the realm of politics. Out of the revival came a renewed interest in using politics to reform society and correct the ills of the nation. American Christians began numerous progressive reform movements such as those launched to abolish slavery, champion women’s rights, and reduce the problematic consumption of alcohol.

2. During the 1800s, Christian men and women began the temperance.

Right Wing Religious Nut Jobs.
there is a difference between people not drinking and sharing their beliefs and the demafasict in the “Progressive Era” making it illegal
 
You're ignoring the 10,000 plus DUI deaths.
Most people use guns for self defense
How many of those 10,000 DUI deaths are the drunk person or those who are in their car and how many are people that were in other cars?
 
How many of those 10,000 DUI deaths are the drunk person or those who are in their car and how many are people that were in other cars?
That information is within the link posted in the op
So you no longer use suicides as a statistic for gun deaths?
 
Guess times have changed, I NEVER bought a weapon, just to shoot targets.
I have sighted in barrel sights and scopes at the shooting range.
Generations are different, I bought guns to kill animals.
Hunting and fishing was very big, when I was a kid then again, we only had 4 channels on a black and white TV and no cell phones or computers.

I never took an interest in guns until I came home from work and somebody robbed my apartment. I knew who the people were but the police told me unless I have evidence it was them, there was nothing they could do.

These were dangerous people so I bought my first gun. I made sure the people involved knew about it as well. After they disappeared out of my life, I used my gun for fun at the gun range. When my neighborhood went downhill, I got my CCW to protect myself outside my home. My sole purpose for owning and carrying a gun is for self-defense.
 
I never took an interest in guns until I came home from work and somebody robbed my apartment. I knew who the people were but the police told me unless I have evidence it was them, there was nothing they could do.

These were dangerous people so I bought my first gun. I made sure the people involved knew about it as well. After they disappeared out of my life, I used my gun for fun at the gun range. When my neighborhood went downhill, I got my CCW to protect myself outside my home. My sole purpose for owning and carrying a gun is for self-defense.
Mine also.
 
Your view is based upon invalid assumptions and falsehoods. It is basically just an emotional appeal supporting prohibition, a failed and harmful policy demonstrated through the ages.

It's common sense really. The less of something around, the less people will use it. If somebody paid me $1,000 to buy fentanyl off the street, that's $1,000 I'd miss out on because I don't know anybody that uses or sells the stuff because it's illegal.

Last year we had over 100,000 fentanyl deaths in the US. Imagine what that number would be if we legalized the stuff.
 
  • 7,334 homicides have alcohol as a contributing factor annually.
That’s not the number I was looking for.

I was asking how many DUI deaths are the drunk driver themselves (or people who chose to ride with the drunk driver).
 
That’s not the number I was looking for.

I was asking how many DUI deaths are the drunk driver themselves (or people who chose to ride with the drunk driver).
That's the number of victims killed by DUI not including the one who was DUI
 
It's common sense really. The less of something around, the less people will use it. If somebody paid me $1,000 to buy fentanyl off the street, that's $1,000 I'd miss out on because I don't know anybody that uses or sells the stuff because it's illegal.

Last year we had over 100,000 fentanyl deaths in the US. Imagine what that number would be if we legalized the stuff.
You don't know whether fewer people drank during the prohibition. You speculate about that, but cannot prove it.

You offer hypotheticals and presumptions, not facts. Prohibition has failed throughout the history of mankind. All it does is create black markets and corrupt the police.
 
You don't know whether fewer people drank during the prohibition. You speculate about that, but cannot prove it.

You offer hypotheticals and presumptions, not facts. Prohibition has failed throughout the history of mankind. All it does is create black markets and corrupt the police.

It all depends on what you consider to be failure. If by failure you mean stop all activity, then I guess you can make that claim. If it's to slow down the activity, then it wasn't a failure at all.

States that legalized pot are having more problems with the stuff than ever. And it didn't stop the illegal sales of pot. The pot pushers just made their products cheaper than the state. But there are more people using pot in those states, more vehicular problems, more problems with achievements in school children.

All I can do is make assumption about prohibition because we never kept track of things like that. Our communication systems were antiquated so it's impossible to come up with any solid evidence of anything. What we can do is look at what happened to states that made pot totally legal for recreational use.
 

Forum List

Back
Top