If guns don't kill people, people kill people is true then isn't the following also true...?

Question

Drugs don't get potheads high, potheads get potheads high.

So if you're against all gun control should you be against all controls on drugs?

Answer 1

In this way guns do not kill people, they need a person to use it in order to kill someone. With your drug analogy, it is also basically true. Drugs just sitting there do not cause people to be high, the person using that drug makes a person a "pothead." So in that way both drugs and guns are innately harmless, but in the hands of people, they are harmful.



I think it's all just circular logic to justify the use of either of them. I don't agree with the use of guns, but I know that in this country it will be hard to pry the guns out of every hick's arms. I'm for drug control, and frankly I've never tried any of them, but I'm also for drug regulation. If all states applied the marijuana laws that Denver did, then the government would be able to not only regulate the consumption of pot (make sure it isn't lined with anything harder), but they could also tax it and make money off that vice like they do alcohol and cigs.



Sorry, that was more a rant. I really don't care about the drug issue, that's just my take on what could be done.

Answer 2

Here's an idea...lets take every situation under the scrutiny of our morality and try to find a quick, easy analogy by which to conform so that we don't have to admit that we have no real sense of moral responsibility. If you are too irresponsible to accept that people can own guns without turning them on other humans I'm glad you hate guns, man.

Answer 3

Yep. IMHO, no gun control and no drug controls would only improve the world. Under the U.S. Constitution I have a right to defend myself as I see fit. Under the same Constitution (right to self-determination) I make the ultimate decisions as to what to put into my body. When do-gooders decide I should not for whatever reason they prefer (moral, religious, ethical, or just because they're control freaks) and enact laws to punish me for doing so, they are infringing on my right to self-determination.



Just as people can choose not to kill each other (using guns, knives, shovels, axes, cars, fists or whichever weapon you choose), people can choose not to get high.



However, your analogy is somewhat off. You're comparing an act of harming another person to an act of harming yourself. Druggies don't get other druggies high. With few, rare exceptions, a druggie can only get him/herself high.

Answer 4

Well, to start with, your original phrase is wrong.

Guns don't kill people. People (in this instance) don't kill people. BULLETS kill people.



Right?



Now, to your analogy. The problem with it is this: If I kill someone with a gun, odds are it is not me. If I get someone high with drugs, odds are it IS me.

Thus, as the other person is necessary, the analogy breaks apart.

Answer 5

I agree that you are right in your analogy. That's why I believe both are wrong.



If guns don't kill people, then drunk driver's don't kill people, the liquor companies kill people.



If guns don't kill people, then smoking doesn't kill cancer, cigarette companies kill people.



If guns don't kill people, then drug dealers don;t sell drugs, a society that allows poverty sells drugs.



Sound a little assinine? Yes. We all need to be a little more realistic.



Guns kill people, pot gets people high, smoking kills you, drinking gets you drunk.

Answer 6

i ve never heard of a pothead going postal have you?

Answer 7

I dnt kill anybody..either

Answer 8

"Guns don't kill people. Cops kill people."

Answer 9

WHAT?