Thank you for proving my point and doing exactly what I said someone would do. I'm not sure you even read what I said " Now I know you're reading this and saying its not the same thing, but they are. I don't think any person needs to leave their house to drink a beer" His (TJ's) argument was why do you need it and you said what you do with them and not why you need it. So you need alcohol because it's consumed? Bars are legal because alcohol is consumed? Your emotion on the subject gets laid out when you say guns kill people as there primary purpose. With little research it's found that guns save more lives than they claim. Guns don't kill, people do. Alcohol doesn't kill, it's the person that drank that should get the blame. BTW, they have laws about how to use a gun just like they do with drinking. How come when the law is broke it's the guns fault? How come when one inanimate object kills (gun) it's the guns fault? But when someone does it with a frying pan it's the persons fault?
So I'll ask again, why do you need alcohol and bars? Remember, alcohol kills more people than guns. So saying guns kill is not a valid argument. It's merely a copout because one you like and the other you don't.
Guns were designed for military use in the way of defeating other armies through the means of killing their soldiers. So yeah, they were designed to kill people.
Trying to pass off the fact that numerous massacres have happened in the US over the past few years with Guns being the primary weapon in the vast majority of them, by comparing it to alcohol consumption which is another topic entirely, is a pisspoor Strawman argument. The topic is about the issue with massacres committed by Guns.
Just to entertain your side argument, how much advertising and awareness is put in about Mentally Unstable people and Guns? Now, how much is put into Drinking and Driving? Personally, I don't actually drink that much. If a regulation was put in that you can only consume X amount of units if you are in a public venue, I wouldn't object to it at all. Sure, it would never happen, but that's pretty much my stance on alcohol.
As for your counter point on the Frying Pan analogy - It comes back to their purpose in design. Guns were made to kill people, sure they protect lives also at this point, but quite frankly, outright abstaining the fact a Gun is the weapon used in almost all of these fatal massacres is shameful. Even PBR admits shit needs to be done on it. It's clear the checks that are meant to be carried out when purchasing a firearm aren't always used, so sorting that out would at least aid in preventing some future shit from happening.
Also - Don't try and put people on a side of the line purely because you disagree with them. I'm very much in the middle on the topic, with an understanding for both sides arguments. Let's put it this way though, if nothing changes on the topic, then all that will happen is more and more mass killings will happen. And for the love of god, don't be one of those twats saying to give every cbomb a gun. Even the idea of schools having security would be an improvement to the situation, but lowering the calibre of weapon available to the general public would also help. I'm sure people like PBR, despite me feeling his gun collection being pretty excessive, use them for recreational purposes. And that demographic will feel hard done by when it comes to the topic of guns when shit like this happens, but at the same point, something has got to give on the issue.