Quote:
and regardless, the question is obviously more complex than that. more cars obviously result in more death. Nobody in their right mind would dispute that.
its not regardless, thats the whole point. what should be uncontroversial has become an intellectual waterloo for a bunch of guys who would flunk out of a community college statistics class all of a sudden becoming internet experts.
i agree its obviously more complex and just because more guns=more crime does not mean more regulation.
when you say no one in their right mind would dispute that more cars=more death in a thread where people still have not acknowledged that more guns=more murder i think thats pretty awesome.
the point is we put speed limits on the roads because the utility of everyone being allowed to drive whatever speed they want has been decided to not be worth the negative effects of such policy. we also believe that setting a speed limit at too low of a point will lower deaths but decrease the utility of using cars to an unacceptable amount.
thats all this argument should be- balancing the utility of gun ownership/usage against its negative effect (more people die), where someone sets that line is their preference (i can think the speed limit should be 75 you say 55 thats 2 people being rational and disagreeing). you can say you are comfortable where gun regulation is but by blocking sensible gun regulations you are comfortable with more people dying than if guns were restricted just as i am aware by setting the speed limit higher more people would die as a result- it doesnt make you or me evil necessarily but in this thread very few have gotten to this point of even acknowledging this.