When I can legally purchase a pack of cigarettes and kill a dozen people in a few minutes with them....then guns and tobacco will be equivalent...speaking about these things in finalities like "everyone will die from cigarettes" is part of the problem...my father in law lived to be a hundred as a chain smoker. As I said...finalities. Safety measures have made smoke free airplanes, movie theaters, etc...to protect the public....we don't have that safety from guns as it stands you can sneak a cigarette on an airplane or a gun probably. The only thing "everyone" will die from is their heart stopping.
Literally 10x more people die every year from cigarettes than guns in the US. As many people die from second hand smoke every year in the US as people who die from all gun deaths, including suicide and gang wars. At least, according to the CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_st... is responsible for,or 1,300 deaths every day. So, we have not banned the sale of cigarettes in the US. And there is no question that cigarettes cause more harm to our citizens than guns. And there is no constitutional right to smoke cigarettes. So the odds of us banning the sale or manufacture of guns is about 0. Thereby, it is simply a distraction from actual solutions.
It took many many years for cigs to be deemed dangerous and it will take many years to finally convince the government to address the gun problem in the proper way. ...and one cigarette in the hands of one individual as opposed to a gun , doesn't result in that person intentionally murdering scores of other people in cold blood on a daily basis.
You and many others. That's why cigarettes kill 10x more. Including at least twice as many innocents. Luckily the only solution for either problem is the same thing. Improved access to education, healthcare, and improved social safety net.
This is like saying bats and butter knives are more dangerous than cigarettes. Sure. In that moment. But that's kind of beside the point. Cigarettes kill exponentially more people than any of these, and there has been no law preventing the sale or manufacture of cigarettes (which are not an explicitly protected right in the constitution). The chances of banning the manufacture or sale of guns in the US are virtually non-existent. This is simple logic. Casting about emotionally will solve nothing. But it is exactly what both Democrats and Republicans want you to do. That's all the gun debate is. A distraction.
Well, those things, plus laws making it more difficult to get cigarettes, esp. for minors, plus laws governing where you could use cigarettes, plus tax disincentives. barfo
And let's acknowledge, pretty much all of this has been done for guns as well (not sure about tax disincentives).
How is over 40,000 second hand smoking deaths per year not choosing to harm others? That's nearly many as all gun deaths, most of which are suicides.
this is clearly false equivalency...gun violence is not heart disease or cancer. You're using the "look, a squirrel" argument here. I'm anti tobacco and anti gun...I've used both in my life. You are throwing out a lot of statistics about death by tobacco which is why you can't use the stuff in most public places here. Tobacco is a drug...a gun is a weapon..it's a false equivilancy so let's get back on topic. Gun violence is on the rise and tobacco use is on the decline. Neither issue is resolved but in the case of tobacco, laws have been passed. You and I will never agree that guns don't solve violence in society and actually contribute to mass killings on an increasing scale. No need to counter. I'll never change my opinion on the subject but I will address it when the opportunity arises
Looks like currently taxes on cigs are about 25% of the total price (or, to put it another way, taxes increase the price by 33%). I vote for taxing guns at at least the same percentage rate. barfo
Interesting concept. Alcohol has been taxed to the point that it's double the price as well. Taxing it doesn't seem to have much of an impact on consumption. I'm not sure how taxes would work considering the 2nd amendment... I'm not 100% opposed to the idea. But I don't think it would have much of an impact.
I didn't bring up the cigarettes, so I'm not the one using the "look, a squirrel“ argument. My point has been that guns and cigarettes are not the same. Guns are far less likely to be outlawed than cigarettes. Guns have constitutional protections that cigarettes don't, and cigarettes kill far more people. The only thing they have in common is that improving access to education and healthcare and improving the social safety net are the best ways to minimize the damages.
