Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

Let's just pause a moment and reject the false equivalency here.

It’s not false. Bans *never* work as long as there remains a market for the goods or services being banned. Drugs, alcohol, gambling, prostitution... You need to kill the market for a ban to work, which requires making people not want the banned thing in the 1st place. #education

That depends on how you define "work." Banning certain things works just fine. I agree that education and a culture shift is necessary, but don't try to tell me restricting agency over someone's body is the same as restricting access to firearms.

Those are actually both “restricting agency over someone’s body” as it relates to personal choices people make. But what things with an active market can you name that have ever been *effectively* banned in this country?

DDT and other persistent organic pollutants, for one. There are others. And no, guns are not part of someone's body. A uterus is.

The market for those things simply shifted to other insecticides. It’s like saying, with guns, “We successfully banned Glocks.” You can ban that brand, but only because there are other options. Self-defense *is* a human right, just as with choosing what to do with your own body.

People are not buying semi-auto weapons of war for self-defense. And yes, the POP ban did work. We don't use those now. Hence why I call for banning specific weapons, not all of them. It's still false to equate right to bodily autonomy with the desire to own weapons of war.