In order to remain logically consistent, anybody favoring banning so-called “assault weapons,” or guns in general, must also support banning alcohol with equal passion.
Ostensibly, gun banners hold their position based on a desire to protect lives and prevent tragedies. Obama alluded to this in a statement made in the wake of the horrible mass shooting inside Sandy Hook Elementary.
“As a country, we have been through this too many times. Whether it is an elementary school in Newtown, or a shopping mall in Oregon, or a temple in Wisconsin, or a movie theater in Aurora, or a street corner in Chicago, these neighborhoods are our neighborhoods, and these children are our children. And we’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics,” he said.
A few days later, the president pledged concrete action.
“But the fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing. The fact that we can’t prevent every act of violence doesn’t mean we can’t steadily reduce the violence, and prevent the very worst violence,” he said during a press conference on Dec. 19. “The good news is there’s already a growing consensus for us to build from. A majority of Americans support banning the sale of military-style assault weapons. A majority of Americans support banning the sale of high-capacity ammunition clips.”
So presumably, the majority of Americans also support banning alcohol. Because the havoc wrecked on American society by booze at least equals, and in reality far exceeds, the horrors brought about by gun violence.
According to the National Highway Traffic Administration, 10,228 people died in drunk driving accidents in 2010. That compares with 11,105 deaths attributed to firearms related homicides, according to the Center for Disease control. The carnage resulting from drunk driving and gun crimes stand close to equal.
Of course, if you include suicide and gun accidents in the statistics, the number of firearms related deaths increase to 31,513.
But a CDC study in 2005 attributes a whopping 75,000 deaths per year in the United States directly to alcohol, including alcohol related diseases and non-vehicle accidents. That’s more than double the number of firearms related deaths. And that doesn’t even begin to touch the damage to families and the violence perpetrated by drunks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, alcohol was a factor in between 19 and 37 percent of violent all crimes from 1997 to 2008.
Clearly, if we must band guns, it follows that we must ban alcohol as well.
As the president said, "We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."
If not a complete ban, at least a ban on the highest proof booze. And obviously, we need to outlaw high capacity containers, like “forties,” 24-packs and kegs. I mean, who can object? Nobody NEEDS alcohol after all.
So, to sum up, if we must take immediate action to restrict guns due to some 32,000 deaths per year, we must also immediately pursue booze-bans due to the 75,000 alcohol related deaths per year. It's only logical.
From this point forward, I will completely disregard any gun-ban-nut who refuses to support alcohol bans as well..