10-07-2015, 01:09 PM
(10-07-2015, 01:04 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem I see with using the auto industry as a comparison is that those safety measures are intended primarily for the user of the vehicle to be protected. While there are things that happen that cause the accidental death of the handler of the firearm, or someone adjacent to them, the media whips up the gun control frenzy when someone kills someone else intentionally.
Seat belts, safety glass, airbags, these things don't stop someone with the intention to injure. They won't stop someone from taking their car and mowing down pedestrians on Main Street when they snap. This creates a disconnect and people aren't as likely to see a need when it is compared in that way.
I see your point. To carry it a step farther the issues of "mass shootings" are completely different from "gun violence", and anytime somone suggest a step to help control "gun viloence" some will dismiss it just because it will not stop "mass shootings".
The huge number of gun deaths and injuries due to accidents should be enough to justify the research.
