(08-06-2019 08:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-06-2019 06:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(08-06-2019 06:43 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-06-2019 06:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(08-06-2019 04:02 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Umm, because there are more people in a confined area?

So I guess you ate saying security should only be provided inareas that serve alcohol? Got it! Ban alcohol.

Oh wait....we tried that with less than outstanding results.

You do know we severely restrict the consumption and production of alcohol, including limiting where it can be sold, when it can sold, how old you can be to buy it, when you can use it, etc, right? Not all regulations surrounding it are great (I personally believe we would benefit from a lower drinking age), but certain regulations make sense. Like how people can be held personally liable if they overserve someone.

Regulations are one thing and can be debated. Bans or prohibitions are another. As has been proven many times over, bans don’t work. Evil/crazy will find a way around those as was the case with Prohibition and firearms bans (see discussion/data above regarding effectiveness of gun bans.)

Ans thanks for the condescending “You do know ...” preamble. Did you read what I wrote? See, two can play that worthless game.

I read what you wrote and I felt a condescending post deserved a condescending response.

I’m generally of the same opinion regarding outright bans of large classes of objects/activities, but don’t feel that bans are all inherently bad and worthless.

For example, I’m a big proponent of at a minimum, decriminalizing all drugs because I would rather we focus on dealers and rehabilitating/treating abusers, and I could care less if you want to get high on your own dime. But I do think banning sales of cigarettes or alcohol to minors makes sense for public health reasons. I also think banning the sale of automatic weapons or grenade launchers is reasonable, given the lack of utility they offer, versus the potential damage they could do. Don’t mind banning people from smoking on planes. Or banning people from drinking and driving.

Yep, those bans on underage drinking and cigarette purchases are real effective. Just proves the point on the limited effectiveness of bans.

No ban (or law for that matter) will be 100% effective. Does that less than 100% effective rate mean that the effort isn’t worthwhile?