Are we doing ourselves any favors repeating this 90% number?

[rrneck]

72. And you still can't explain how a law that you support will work.

What do you get if only 80% of the public thinks something is a good idea?


http://www.economist.com/node/16930683

Looks like overwhelming bi partisan support for a war. You know, three trillion dollars of debt, hundreds of thousands of casualties, Gitmo, torture, an entire region destabilized, gigantic transfer of wealth to the 1%, the elevation of W to status of "war president".

So what makes you think 90% of the public polled after a national tragedy want something that makes sense? Why don't you try to work past an argumentum ad populum and actually discuss the issue? I find it fascinating that people repeatedly flee to a sort of fundamentalist litany when they can't or won't consider what their ideology will do in the real world. The legislation was public knowledge. The means of enforcement are public knowledge. The infrastructure to facilitate the law is public knowledge. I have given you a boatload of concrete information to discuss and yet you flee to a conspiracy laden litany about "gun nuts".

We got a goddamn illegal war with eighty percent support, but we couldn't get something as obviously wonderful and seemingly benign as universal background checks with ninety percent support.

Explain why. How will universal background checks actually impact the lives of people? What will people with various sorts of relationships actually have to do to comply with the law? How will it actually make them safer? What price will they have to pay for that increased security if it exists? What will be the political ramifications of the law?