It doesn’t really matter if it’s an edge case or not. 277 people died because of it, many children. That’s not ok. I understand that people will go to great lengths to defend (often illogically) what they feel is their right, but your rights end where someone else’s rights begin. 277 lives, even if it’s over 25 years, is not worth an unsecured bullet in the chamber. It’s not even worth one life.
“On average, about nine children under 5 years of age die every year from strangling in window blinds, shades, draperies and other window coverings with cords.”
So 225 over 25 years. Again, not statistically significant.
A child dying from something that could have been prevented cannot be dismissed as a simple statistical insignificance. That’s the most cynical thing I’ve heard in a while.
We should ban seat belts, then. Theres a non-zero chance that they could trap you in a car in a crash leading to your death. Never mind that the chance is statistically insignificant.
Also, do other countries mandate this safety feature?
Seat belts are designed specifically to save people’s lives. In action, they prevent a lot more deaths than they cause. Firearms are designed specifically to take people’s lives. In action, they cause a lot more deaths than they prevent.
It seems Trump has no problem advocating for undoing the 14th Amendment to ban birthright citizenship. If he does that, I see no problem undoing the 2nd Amendment.
It doesn’t really matter if it’s an edge case or not. 277 people died because of it, many children. That’s not ok. I understand that people will go to great lengths to defend (often illogically) what they feel is their right, but your rights end where someone else’s rights begin. 277 lives, even if it’s over 25 years, is not worth an unsecured bullet in the chamber. It’s not even worth one life.
277 people… over 25 years. It’s statistically insignificant on a population of 300 million people.
By point of comparison:
https://www.cpsc.gov/Newsroom/News-Releases/2023/Nearly-Half-of-Incidents-with-Kids-and-Corded-Window-Coverings-Resulted-in-Death-GoCordless-to-Save-Lives
“On average, about nine children under 5 years of age die every year from strangling in window blinds, shades, draperies and other window coverings with cords.”
So 225 over 25 years. Again, not statistically significant.
A child dying from something that could have been prevented cannot be dismissed as a simple statistical insignificance. That’s the most cynical thing I’ve heard in a while.
Individual tragedies are never going to be prevented. You might as well mandate kids exist in giant hamster balls 24/7.
Oh, but then they might suffocate.
It’s perfectly preventable in other countries. In the western world, this is pretty much a uniquely American experience.
We should ban seat belts, then. Theres a non-zero chance that they could trap you in a car in a crash leading to your death. Never mind that the chance is statistically insignificant.
Also, do other countries mandate this safety feature?
Seat belts are designed specifically to save people’s lives. In action, they prevent a lot more deaths than they cause. Firearms are designed specifically to take people’s lives. In action, they cause a lot more deaths than they prevent.
It’s hyperbole. An exaggerated example to prove a point.
Guns are used 60,000+ times per year in defensive situations.
And hundreds of thousands of times in criminal situations, including more than 10,000 gun-related homicides.
You can’t undo the 2nd amendment, there are over 400 million guns in the country.
The fact that there are only 11 deaths per year on a population of 400 million guns shows just how insignificant the problem is.
It’s not even a “1 in a million” kind of thing.
It’s a 1 in 36 million kind of thing.
It seems Trump has no problem advocating for undoing the 14th Amendment to ban birthright citizenship. If he does that, I see no problem undoing the 2nd Amendment.
Yeah, no amendment can be undone in the current climate.
Doing it requires 290 votes in the House, a body that last needed 15 tries to get a 218 vote simple majority to decide who their own leader will be.
Then you need a 67 vote majority in the Senate, a body that’s blocked from doing anything by a 60 vote majority to break a filibuster.
If by some miracle, both of those things happen, then the change needs to be ratified by 38 states.
In the last election, Trump won 31 states, so he’d need 7 Harris states to back him on repealing an amendment. Aint happening.