Without people eating the bad food, they don't suffer the negative health effects. There are better foods around and they know it. Without people being stupid and irresponsible around firearms, no one suffers the negative health effects. The presence of something has less to do with it's effect on society than how society acts on it's presence. In Washington D.C. and Chicago, youth are subject to strict gun control and low social standards, the gun crime is out of control though. In Zurich, the youth are subject to less gun control, yet a higher social standard, and the gun crime is lower.
Yes, we have many fat people in the US, but the obesity rate is higher in Australia. (Unrelated, just thought like bringing it up)
Interesting perspectives. I can certainly agree that gun-violence is more of a symptom than the disease itself. That doesn't mean that we can't treat the symptom, on the other hand. But of course, a higher standard of living is the true answer.
I'm not sure. That's a matter of opinion, and a broad, unspecified question. If you've been properly instructed on how to use the weapon safely and when not to use it, I guess it's not stupid. If you have a fascination with a weapon and go out to buy it with no previous experience, and a track record of irresponsibility, then it would be stupid.
What I'm getting at is the tendency to point everything to people and little to other factors. Like the existance of poor people, not because there naturally isn't a seat for them in the game of revolving chair, but because they were the worst.
If arming oneself is smart or stupid based on whether you yourself are smart or stupid (can a stupid person really be properly instructed?) creates sort of a logical loop-hole, where all stances sort of lose all of their power. Environmentalism or consumerism? Answer: stupid people could ruin it. Republicans or democrats in office? That depends. Who has the less stupid people? Why care about the underlying principles of the subject when we can instead focus on the traits of people?
I tend to see humans as one, and very flexible. If stupid people are able to be reckless with guns, that means humans can be reckless with guns. If thieves can rob and steal, that means humans can rob and steal. It's not just them either. If you were as desperate as they were, you would probably do the same.
There will always be stupid people, and that's exactly why we should take precaution around dangerous stuff. Since we're in a society together, we sort of have to restrict some of our rights so that lunatics don't go off and kill everyone. That's why private citizens doesn't have the right to nuclear arms, and for the same reason, I think guns should be restricted.
