# How is the Constitutional Right to Bear Arms So Heavily Infringed Upon? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 8, 2018, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781 "2018-12-08T04:16:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/581 "2019-01-15T16:57:58Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The point was that there is no opposition to reducing and preventing drunk driving. There certainly is opposition to reducing and preventing mass (and other) shootings. There’s no opposition to reducing mass shootings, there’s opposition to a ban on semi-automatic rifles, which there’s a frequent push for. If you oppose prohibition, I wouldn’t say that you’re against reducing drunk driving deaths. > [@](#): > > None who claim it’s in the Constitution or God-given, though, right? The fact that it’s an enumerated right in the Constitution is a significant detail, but I’ll disregard that for the purposes of the discussion. It’s usually a non-starter about gun policy. > [@](#): > > Are you asserting that there is an acceptable number of gun victims you think we should “pay” in order for you to keep your ability to cause them? Alcohol has uses and is not intended to cause death. Guns, not the case. But you’re looking for ways to excuse them. Alcohol has uses? Such as? Medically? We could reserve alcohol for medical uses the way we do with illicit substances now like opioids. The point is, we could drastically cut down on thousands of deaths if we banned or heavily restricted alcohol, but instead we satisfy ourselves mostly with harsh punishments, checkpoints, other measures. And fatal alcohol-related crashes are down over the last few decades. [So are gun homicides.](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Ss_1C-2c_SWZbQOO6jwSUU3UOGc=/0x0:417x395/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:417x395):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3985642/firearm%20homicide%20deaths.png) What I don’t understand is why everyone is satisfied with the progress on one but not the other. Why we look at alcohol-related road deaths declining and say, “Let’s keep it up! Looking good.” But when there’s a similar drop in gun homicides after numerous gun control measures over the years, it’s an outrage. ---
**Author:** ![JB99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JB99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JB99)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/582 "2019-01-15T17:19:22Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So, lets make people criminal because of what they might do!:rolleyes: > > Hey, Smoking kills 500000 Americans a year. Booze kills 50000 or more. Are you a drinker? But you’re a\* responsible\* drinker, right? It doesn’t matter. You \*might \*drive drunk, so let’s ban booze. I don’t drink or smoke, and I don’t see a problem with your proposal. Since smoking and drinking serve absolutely no useful function, I would not care if they were entirely gone. ---
**Author:** ![JB99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JB99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JB99)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/583 "2019-01-15T17:22:20Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > My reality is called due process, presumption of innocence, etc. Come join us, we have snacks. We tried it your way. It didn’t work. I can’t comprehend why you would want to keep trying a failed policy. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/584 "2019-01-15T17:33:15Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > Yes, there’s organized opposition to mass shootings as well. And there definitely is a school of thought that the freedom of Americans to consume alcohol should not be restricted because of a few bad people. > > Here’s a thought experiment. Restricting alcohol access would prevent deaths. Some people would still make moonshine, but drunk driving deaths would go down, as well as other alcohol-related deaths due to the fact that obtaining alcohol would be prohibitive for most people. So how would you react to this question: The thousands of dead people every year due to alcohol, is that a price you’re just willing to pay to be able to drink? How would you react to that argument? Prohibition of alcohol was tried in the USA but repealed, and dry countries still have bad car death rates (ostensibly from having really bad drivers – Saudi Arabia, I’m looking at you, for although you are a developing country, you have been a high income country for decades, so get your act together), so reducing impaired driving deaths in first world countries usually has come down to a combination of education, graduated licensing, BAC restriction, and enforcement. The [USA isn’t doing too well](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate) compared to most first world nations’ traffic death rate per distance driven. If I could wave my magic wand, I’d go with zero tolerance for alcohol impairment (not to mention other types of impairment, but that is for another discussion) while driving, including testing without cause of people driving and testing with cause of people shortly after driving, 0 or trace BAC applied to all drivers, accessible counselling, out-patient and in-patient treatment programs, [alcohol education from age nine](http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2015/08/26/peds.2015-2337.full.pdf) and continuing throughout elementary and secondary education, [strong media and social media campaigns](https://youtu.be/7l5Wa94ynss), allocate extra resources to states where there is a high proportion of high private vehicle use and high poverty ratesa ([for the most part red states](https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/10/the-geography-of-car-deaths-in-america/410494/), and no, I’m not trying to make a crack at red states), and very strict application of driving prohibitions, including lifetime bans and criminal penalties for repeat offenders and serious offenders. In other words, treat it as a serious social, education and health problem, distribute resources to best effect, and absolutely keep the incorrigibles off the road (that’s why God invented cites, public transit and taxis rather than blanket alcohol prohibition). Is it possible to put effective gun control in place that generally permits gun ownership, hunting, and recreational shooting? Of course it is. Just look about at most other first world countries. Hell, just look north to Canada where Americans flock to go hunting, where we promote hunting, where hunting is a major economic contributor, and where it literally puts much of the food on the table for a significant portion of our northern population. Although we have a lot of game wandering about, what we don’t have is religious fetish for guns enshrined in our constitution. It is hard to change the belief of a true believer, and when it comes to guns, the USA is a true believer, reality be damned. Want to greatly reduce gun deaths over the years, and by doing so reduce the murder rate overall? Get serious in dealing with racialized poverty and get serious in dealing with your gun fetish. Until you do this, you will remain a disgrace. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/585 "2019-01-15T17:35:22Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > There’s no opposition to reducing mass shootings, there’s opposition to a ban on semi-automatic rifles The distinction is a bit elusive. > [@](#): > > The fact that it’s an enumerated right in the Constitution is a significant detail As is the part that explains its purpose and limitations. :dubious: > [@](#): > > Alcohol has uses? Such as? Entertainment, dining, socialization. If used moderately. Guns? > [@](#): > > What I don’t understand is why everyone is satisfied with the progress on one but not the other. Why we look at alcohol-related road deaths declining and say, “Let’s keep it up! Looking good.” But when there’s a similar drop in gun homicides after numerous gun control measures over the years, it’s an outrage. “Let’s keep up adding gun control measures too! Looking good!”. Works for me. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/586 "2019-01-15T18:13:09Z")
> [@JB99](#): > > We tried it your way. It didn’t work. > > I can’t comprehend why you would want to keep trying a failed policy. From some of your other posts, it seems like you have a hard time understanding why anyone would disagree with you. I can live with that. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/587 "2019-01-15T18:32:54Z")
> [@JB99](#): > > We tried it your way. It didn’t work. > > I can’t comprehend why you would want to keep trying a failed policy. Open access to guns isnt a failed policy. Violent crime is on the decrease. Guns are on the increase. However, we do know, for sure that Prohibition- both the classic one on booze and the current War on Drugs- is a failed policy. I dont know why you would suggest a _third failed policy-_ a Prohibition on Guns. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/588 "2019-01-15T18:34:10Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The point was that there is no opposition to reducing and preventing drunk driving. There certainly is opposition to reducing and preventing mass (and other) shootings… No, there isnt any such opposition. If it was obvious that gun control would reduce such mass shooting, maybe. But the facts show otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/589 "2019-01-15T18:39:19Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > No, there isnt any such opposition. Tell us more about assault rifle bans. Hell, just tell us about bump stocks. > [@](#): > > If it was obvious that gun control would reduce such mass shooting, maybe. But the facts show otherwise. You have an unconventional definition of “facts”, then. And yes, nothing could be more obvious. Now quit stalling and join us. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/590 "2019-01-15T18:48:36Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Entertainment, dining, socialization. If used moderately. Guns? You could make some of these same arguments for guns. Hunting, socializing, sport, etc. > [@](#): > > “Let’s keep up adding gun control measures too! Looking good!”. Works for me. The point was none of the alcohol measures include banning liquor or certain types of alcohol. With guns, they do. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/591 "2019-01-15T18:54:56Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Entertainment, dining, socialization. If used moderately. Guns? Hunting (dining), home defense, security, entertainment, socialization. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/592 "2019-01-15T18:58:44Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Tell us more about assault rifle bans. Hell, just tell us about bump stocks. > > You have an unconventional definition of “facts”, then. And yes, nothing could be more obvious. Now quit stalling and join us. Assault rifles are already banned. “Assault weapons”, otoh, are hard to define, and are used but very rarely in crime. Why ban something so rarely used? The NRA supports the bump stock ban. [https://home.nra.org/joint-statement](https://home.nra.org/joint-statement) Well obvious to you, but the facts say otherwise. Violent crime has been on a downward turn for decades and gun sales are increasing. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/593 "2019-01-15T19:07:36Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > You could make some of these same arguments for guns. Hunting, socializing, sport, etc. True, but those are \*incidental \*to their primary purpose. > [@](#): > > The point was none of the alcohol measures include banning liquor or certain types of alcohol. With guns, they do. There are extensive measures in place, and more constantly being evaluated and added, to prevent \*driving \*while drunk - which, if you’ll recall, is the analogy you wished to raise. No one opposes them. We do recognize driving as being a necessity of everyday life, and need to make it as safe as we reasonably can. Guns are \*not \*a necessity of life except in a few well-defined arenas (hunting for meat, protecting livestock). Efforts to limit the damage they can cause are intensely opposed. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/594 "2019-01-15T19:11:19Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Prohibition of alcohol was tried in the USA but repealed, and dry countries still have bad car death rates (ostensibly from having really bad drivers – Saudi Arabia, I’m looking at you, for although you are a developing country, you have been a high income country for decades, so get your act together), so reducing impaired driving deaths in first world countries usually has come down to a combination of education, graduated licensing, BAC restriction, and enforcement. The [USA isn’t doing too well](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate) compared to most first world nations’ traffic death rate per distance driven. You’re entire post was well thought out, but I wanted to quibble with this. I don’t think you’re suggesting that road fatalities would remain the same if we banned alcohol, that all the people who would have died to a drunk driver would instead die to a bad driver. So the argument here is somewhat like the argument from pro-gun individuals that people kill each other in gun-restrictive countries anyway, with knives, trucks, and bombs, so banning guns isn’t the solution. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/595 "2019-01-15T19:16:11Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > True, but those are \*incidental \*to their primary purpose. You could argue that, “Entertainment, dining, socialization. If used moderately.” Are incidental to the purpose of getting drunk. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > There are extensive measures in place, and more constantly being evaluated and added, to prevent \*driving \*while drunk - which, if you’ll recall, is the analogy you wished to raise. No one opposes them. \*\*We do recognize driving as being a necessity of everyday life, and need to make it as safe as we reasonably can. Guns are _not a necessity of life_ except in a few well-defined arenas (hunting for meat, protecting livestock). Efforts to limit the damage they can cause are intensely opposed. Drinking alcohol isn’t a necessity of everyday life either. I’m not asking why people don’t want to ban driving after a drunk driving crash, I’m asking why they don’t want to ban alcohol after thousands of drunk driving deaths per year. The reason I ask is because that’s exactly what people do when confronted with a comparable number of deaths by guns. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/596 "2019-01-15T19:18:07Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > True, but those are \*incidental \*to their primary purpose. > … Guns are \*not \*a necessity of life except in a few well-defined arenas (hunting for meat, protecting livestock). … No, those \*are \*their primary use. It’s a little hard to say the primary use of a gun is murdering someone, when like one in 30,000 is used for that. Many people think armed security is a necessity, as well as armed police. And of course two thirds of of American and the Supreme Court agree that home defense is a necessity of life and a right. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/597 "2019-01-15T19:21:34Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > You’re entire post was well thought out, but I wanted to quibble with this. I don’t think you’re suggesting that road fatalities would remain the same if we banned alcohol, that all the people who would have died to a drunk driver would instead die to a bad driver. So the argument here is somewhat like the argument from pro-gun individuals that people kill each other in gun-restrictive countries anyway, with knives, trucks, and bombs, so banning guns isn’t the solution. Actually they might. In the later stages of Prohibition, drunkenness more or less returned to it’s normal state, what with bathtub gin, speakeasies and ect. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2019, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/598 "2019-01-15T19:49:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Actually they might. In the later stages of Prohibition, drunkenness more or less returned to it’s normal state, what with bathtub gin, speakeasies and ect. I’d be curious to see how, 100 years later, Prohibition would go down. I feel like the underground element would of course be there, but that most people, those who just have a few beers on the weekend, would just quit. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2019, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/599 "2019-01-19T13:24:41Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Seeing as how the problems you want others to tackle first are just as difficult(or even more difficult) to solve, this is basically saying that you don’t think the problem of firearm violence is really worth bothering with at all. Bing-fucking-o. For DrDeth and his ilk, and the rabid members of the NRA, firearm deaths are at an acceptable level, and they don’t care to take any means whatsoever to do anything that would reduce them significantly. Someone earlier in the thread admitted as much. They should all just say this and own up to it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2019, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781/600 "2019-01-19T17:31:08Z")
Right, _somebody else’s_ death is acceptable to them as a price for _somebody else_ to pay. Somebody abstract. Somebody not quite real. Somebody dismissible, not as important as the self or the family. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-so-heavily-infringed-upon/825781.md?page=31)