teedubbya wrote:If you are referring to my comments I don't care if you compare them. I say address them both. Put resources in to both.
Just don't use one to distract from the other or suggest one is somehow glorified or over publicized (which I don't think you did TG). We just had a 17 year old senior die in a single vehicle accident 2 weeks ago. Its been huge news and is horrible.
I really don't see the intent for imputing one issue in to a discussion on the other. Either or both are horrific and I don't find them very similar other than they both include death. The auto accident one seems to have more accessible or viable/visible solutions that I'm not sure translate to school shootings.
The analogies are used because they involve senseless deaths.
With the shooting we hear that some people want to ban law abiding citizens from exercising one of their current freedoms. And the reason is that somebody else might abuse something. (YOU can't own an AR-15 because some wacko might use one to kill kids).
We could use this same logic to say that YOU can't own a large vehicle capable of going fast, because somebody else might use it to plow into a crowd. Or YOU can't buy a glass of wine, because somebody else will abuse it and cause a crash.
It's a sound analogy. Another person is irresponsible and causes death, so YOU have to relinquish your freedoms.
The thing about analogies is that the two things are never exactly alike. The analogy is what pulls them together, it shows the comparison.
People claim that an analogy is wrong. that it's "apples and oranges". But that's often because it disproves their argument, not because it's not relevant.
I agree with you. Address them both.
But I'm tired of people being so cavalier with freedoms after a heart wrenching tragedy.