Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
ummmm...no....banning something is not close to the same thing as fining someone for not wearing something...it's practically the opposite....do I have to explain further?
|
Man oh man...
I agree, banning possession isn't the same as forcing you to do something...
But I'll say two things..
(1) those two things are similar in this regard...people who opposed seat belt laws, and people who always oppose gun regulation, often use this kind of an argument..."the law won't guarantee that there will be zero deaths going forward". That is a very, very common argument, and it's completely absurd. No law is perfect. Laws against murder, don't prevent 100% of murders, but it would be asinine to use that as an excuse to do away with anti-murder laws. But if the law does some good, and is constitutional, it may be worth enacting. Saving some lives isn't as good as saving all lives, but it's better than nothing.
(2) we currently ban the possession of all kinds of things...that in and of itself, isn't a totalitarian concept. I don't want George Soros to have a nuke just because he can afford one.