Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)

8. There are fundamental differences between the two

Reply to fadedrose (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:35 PM

Dec 2012

Smoking is the use of a recreational drug use with side effects both to the user and people nearby. It normally had long term health consequences as well. Firearms have some legitimate uses outside of emotional satisfaction.

The key here is the sickness of violence. The US population has had access to these kinds of weapons since WWI, but today we have record levels of violence and perhaps mental illness. What has changed?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I don't know how in the hell the anti-smokers people [View all] fadedrose Dec 2012 OP

guns are, apparently, more addictive than cigarettes. - n/t lapfog_1 Dec 2012 #1

We had a National conversation about Four Loko alcohol and it was banned in like what, 3 weeks? JaneyVee Dec 2012 #2

Trivia: The first anti-smoking campaign was started by the Nazis. Jamastiene Dec 2012 #3

Perfect! NYC_SKP Dec 2012 #4

No wonder I felt an evil influence....it is interesting! nt fadedrose Dec 2012 #5

What's truly evil is exposing people liberalhistorian Dec 2012 #10

I don't think King James could have been a Nazi... JHB Dec 2012 #11

You want to pay $200 a month for my asthma meds? XemaSab Dec 2012 #6

I never smoked in the same room as kids or sick people fadedrose Dec 2012 #7

"it's good that there's not cigarette smoke everywhere you go. That's how it should be with guns." leeroysphitz Dec 2012 #14

There are fundamental differences between the two ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #8

Bit of correction needed, but a germ of a maybe. dmallind Dec 2012 #9

They changed the collective conscience, which arthritisR_US Dec 2012 #12

why would you want a gun ban as toothless as most smoking bans? uncle ray Dec 2012 #13

If enough people got angry enough we could put cost prohibitive taxes on non-hunting weapons leeroysphitz Dec 2012 #15

the non-stop harping of non-smokers helped me quit Skittles Dec 2012 #16

The larger point is well-taken: what SEEMS politically "impossible" is actually possible alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #17