If it saves only one life, it makes sense" The line was just used by Biden, supposedly quoting the President http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57563314/biden-gun-violence-proposals-to-obama-by-tuesday/
This particular time it’s about gun control, but it’s been used many times, by many people, on many issues, before.
Usually it’s to do something that costs the proposer little or nothing, but impinges or costs others at least somewhat or something.
So, shutting down the NYC subway costs me nothing. I’m nowhere near. And 2 people were killed horrifically just recently by being pushed in front of a train, and I know others have died in and around it.
So it’s time to shut it down. Who’s with me?
I’m with you! Let’s stop driving too!
STOP EATING FOOD! Someone might choke to death.
Ferris Wheels. We should definitely ban Ferris Wheels.
Yep! Let’s do that banning alcohol thing again. Alcohol causes all kinds of death.
And gun control threads!
Another earlier Bidenism regarding those dangerous subways:
“I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places now. … When one person sneezes it goes all the way through the aircraft. That’s me. I would not be, at this point, if they had another way of transportation, suggesting they ride the subway.” --Joe Biden, providing handy tips to protect against the swine flu and freaking us out, “Today Show” interview, April 30, 2009
If we kill all Humans, it may cost billions of lives all at once, but I promise, we’ll never again lose another Human for any reason whatsoever!
Yeah! And it worked so well last time too! 
As with anything, context is important.
Making subways safer could be as easy as having a barrier between the subway tube and the platform where the passengers wait, which is raised or lowered to allow passengers in, and then closed when the train departs, thus ensuring that passengers can’t get trapped on the rails.
The only question then is the cost. Is it possible to do it affordably, and the answer may very well be no. But there can be a sane and rational discussion regarding subway safety.
In a similar vein, it’s possible to have a discussion regarding how we can make guns safer, how to keep guns out of the hands of unsafe people, and what sort of limits we can put on guns whose usage could only be mass murder.
Gun safety is an issue that’s already been tackled by governments and manufacturers alike. That’s for accidental discharges. But what about a weapon which is not meant for hunting, or home defense?
What about a weapon that can be used to kill dozens of people in mere seconds? Enough ammunition to take out an entire crowd of people without reloading?
This is not a human right, and it shouldn’t be a legal right. It’s entirely unnecessary. It doesn’t give victims a fighting chance to survive.
This sort of debate is pathetic. Some people seem to believe that they should have limitless right to own any kind of mass-murdering device, and that this is a basic necessity and human right. Those people are sociopaths and I’d really rather they packed up their murder-fetish tools and left the country entirely. Go live in Somalia where they don’t have to worry about government intervention, and they can have all the guns they want, and they might actually need them.
Works for me. Let’s be honest here. We really do suck.
Who’s up for some doomsday brain storming? A super virus would be fine, but lacks panache. I’m thinking some sort of orbital solar beam. Kinda like a big magnifying glass, but jazzier.
As is the entire quote:
Stupid people really are at their cutest when they think they are making a point.
A silly comparison. People need transport (and don’t need guns in almost all cases), and all transport is dangerous. You shut down the subway, fine; people will use other means of transport which are likely to be more not less dangerous, especially since they will be overloaded.
It also fails as an anti-gun control argument because pro-gun people don’t care about human life in the first place. They don’t care about “just one life”, or a hundred, or a thousand, or a million. They’d cheerfully mount their gun collection on top of a mountain of innocent corpses; to them guns are what matter, and nothing else. They have no morals, no honor, no loyalty, no morality, no concern for friends or family; just the all-consuming worship of guns.
Wow, way to project.
No; way to listen to what they say.
Only a small, noisy percentage. I don’t know where you live, but in many places you’d be surprised to find out how many of your neighbors own guns, because you never see them.
Some sort of Sun Ra sun ray?
CMC
If they aren’t “noisy” then they aren’t “pro-gun”.
Really? What do you base that on?