Mass intoxication

[night_son]

In this era of mass shootings, more and more people want to ban guns.

However:

There are some 88,000 deaths due to alcohol in the US in 2018, a drug that kills more people every year than any other drug, and it dwarfs the number of gun deaths in the US

Should the US go back to prohibition? Why are there not more who want to ban alcohol as well?

2018 Alcoholism Statistics You Need to Know | Talbott Recovery

The issue for me is morality. Laugh if you will but consider the following.

IF society has the morality of a prison cell, then to maintain order you will have to take all sharp objects away from them and somehow contain them to maintain any measure of civil order.

In a society that has rejected the notion that morality is more important than making money, and a society that is rejecting God more and more, we draw closer to an amoral police state.

The Lefts answer is simply to cork all forks and increase taxes to help the state control society. Their answer is that money will solve all our problems if only the money were in the right hands

Prove me wrong Dems.

Do you have an military assault weapon??

Do you have any idea what that is? Further, it's none of your business. Tell me, do you remember those Styrofoam bricks for sale back in the 80's? The one's sold in department stores people could use to throw at their television sets when something happened that pissed them off in their favorite shows? Well, I am throwing one of those at your post, in spirit.

I know I shot a M16 in the service and I know there is not a need of them in the hands of civilians in the US. Keep your gun and hunting rifle, but not assault weapons.

Did you wound it badly when you "shot" it? When I went through OSUT at Ft. Leonard Wood nearly thirty years ago we "fired" our weapons for qualification. As long as the police and military continue to bear the latest in combat rifles, which they must, so should the American People be unrestricted in keeping and bearing the same. There's no need for a three-round burst trigger group or armor piercing ammo, say the gun grabbers. I say that's all fine and good until that need arises, and someday it might.

What would anyone need a military assault rifle? If China or Iran attacks us, it wouldn't be with guns.

Who said anything about China or Iran?

 

[Lysistrata]

Do you have an military assault weapon??

Do you have any idea what that is? Further, it's none of your business. Tell me, do you remember those Styrofoam bricks for sale back in the 80's? The one's sold in department stores people could use to throw at their television sets when something happened that pissed them off in their favorite shows? Well, I am throwing one of those at your post, in spirit.

I know I shot a M16 in the service and I know there is not a need of them in the hands of civilians in the US. Keep your gun and hunting rifle, but not assault weapons.

Did you wound it badly when you "shot" it? When I went through OSUT at Ft. Leonard Wood nearly thirty years ago we "fired" our weapons for qualification. As long as the police and military continue to bear the latest in combat rifles, which they must, so should the American People be unrestricted in keeping and bearing the same. There's no need for a three-round burst trigger group or armor piercing ammo, say the gun grabbers. I say that's all fine and good until that need arises, and someday it might.

What would anyone need a military assault rifle? If China or Iran attacks us, it wouldn't be with guns.

Who said anything about China or Iran?

They are two of the countries (I forgot Russia) who might invade the U.S. We are particularly difficult to invade, as we take up most of the continent. There is no use for such weapons by private citizens inside the United States, and I bet the National Guard has them stowed in armories, anyway. Pistols and hunting rifles should do for any occurrence within the U.S.

 

[Votto]

They tried banning alcohol...banning guns would have the same results

I've come to the conclusion that Prohibition was a Progressive scam. For you see, they tried to create a Federal income tax prior to the turn of the 20th century, but SCOTUS said it was not Constitutional.

Today in History: Income Tax Ruled Unconstitutional in Pollock v. Farmers Loan Trust Co. | Tax Foundation

So the Progressives were faced with adding it to the Constitution.

They looked out how the Federal government was funded, which was primarily with taxes from alcohol sales. Then they looked at the societal problems alcohol was causing, which was worse than it is today in many ways, so they suggested Prohibition to gain support for the Federal Income tax which it did.

Then once they passed the Federal Income tax as a Constitutional amendment and introduced Prohibition, there was no longer a need to enforce Prohibition which was largely ignored. Bootleggers were even coming into the Capital to sell alcohol to the Congressmen for all to see. Then they could let Prohibition fail, and let the state resume the taxes on alcohol as we see the state run liquor stores across the country.

The added bonus was blaming Prohibition on the Evangelical Christians.

At the end of the day, they had revenue coming from the Federal Income tax, alcohol sales, and bad PR for evangelicals. It was a win/win/win!!