I'll jump back in because I love the car analogy.
In 1977 automotive fatalities had come off a decade of 50,000 deaths per year. It was decided more regulations needed to be implemented and over the course of the next decade we saw safety standards all across the transportation sector increase. This is the era that brought us all the technologies that now keep us safer than ever including anti-lock brakes, collapsing steering columns, airbags, crumple zones, three-point seat belts, and the list goes on. At the same time, roadways improved and regulations multiplied. Stiffer laws for DUI were implemented. Manditory seatbelt laws were created and finally...child seats required by law. There was a global approach to safer automobile travel.
The result: We reduced automobile fatalities by a full 50%. That reduction can be wholly attributed to the collection of efforts applied to that result - directly.
While there are those who have drawn loose correlations between the proliferation of guns in the US to a reduction in homicides over that same period, that connection is not very tenable and disputed by many social experts. More telling are the predictions that our rapid proliferation of weapons is not sustainable, and we can't continue to flood the streets with guns and not be where we are...one of the most violent countries in the world.
Earlier someone pegged me as not applying any logic to this discussion, which I don't think is accurate. I believe we all have our own way of applying our intellect and experience to this topic. I still contend, adding more guns with fewer regulations simply does not seem like the path to a less violent country.
And as a moderator and member, I want to thank everyone for keeping this discussion polite, thoughtful and interesting.
