That's a reasonable statement. The nuance is that guns are designed with the specific purpose to kill things. They are intrinsically a weapon, unlike the other mentioned things. I think that's a pretty clear "nuance" that most people recognize without it needing to be pointed out.Condescension wrote: ↑Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:27 pmIt's not really whataboutism since that's more about political behavior. It's an argument to absurdity. As Octavious said, it's about logical consistency. Logic is universal, and if we took the logic people used to discuss guns and applied it to other parts of life it clearly falls apart. The argument "it kills people therefore it should be banned" is incomplete and requires further argumentation and nuance, because the argument in that form can be applied to basically anything. What makes guns *distinct* from these examples?
There are absolutely good arguments in favor of banning guns. They do not exist in the popular discourse because the popular discourse just stops at "waaah guns kill people!"
What frustrates me is that these arguments don't, for the most part, seem to be brought up for the purpose of clarifying the argument, but rather obfuscating it by drawing attention elsewhere.
The point is that *something* needs to be done to quell the pandemic of gun violence in the US.
If you also want to discuss the diabetes pandemic, or the absurd hypocrisy of drunk driving regulations, that's fine. One doesn't preclude the other.