Alcohol Deaths Outnumber Firearm Murders, So Should We Bring Back Prohibition?

[John Dibble]

Stop trolling. The two aren't comparable and you know it. We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

I'm fine with the right to bear arms, but arguments like this are stupid and do not help.

[John Dibble]

We already have a well known historical example to show that alcohol prohibition is not effective, is veritably unenforceable, and causes a noticeable increase in violent crime due to black market forces.

Why would prohibition on firearms be different?

One is a consumable good and the other is a durable one, which obviously affects how often consumers buy the product. This affects the model of demand, as consumers will repeatedly buy one and only buy the other in a limited fashion. Additionally, one is easy to make, requires common materials, and only a little know how (to the point that people can make it at home without too much effort, if they are so inclined, which many were during prohibition) while the other requires specialized manufacturing equipment, materials, and knowledge to produce. These factors make one far more lucrative than the other, and as such you'd see a far bigger black market for alcohol than guns. These are the same reasons we the war on drugs is an utter failure and yet we are mostly able to enforce the ban on automatic weapons.

[John Dibble]

All of this goes out the window because you've not accounted for the fact that we already have more firearms than people in the country, and most of these firearms can last well over 100 years if properly maintained.

The problem you posit here is primarily one that only applies to a ban at the start of it. Presumably any prohibition on guns would involve confiscating the existing ones. I would expect some violent resistance, but the vast majority of people will just hand them over to avoid trouble. Long term it would be much more viable - just look at other countries that have high restrictions on gun ownership.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As was pointed out 3D printed guns are at this time are primitive. The materials available for 3D printing are not sufficiently strong to produce a durable weapon - example. Even if quality materials were available, the high end 3d printers that could use them are extremely expensive (tens of thousands of dollars) and sold/leased by a very limited number of companies, and as such it would be easy to trace who has those printers and keep tabs on them. Additionally you won't be able to get materials from just anywhere, and government regulation could keep track of orders for materials that could be used for such purposes. There's also again the matter that 3d printing will require technical expertise that most people just won't be able to get.