When your best argument against guns is child pornography its time to re-evaluate your moral trajectory. If your conclusion is that we allow porn under the first amendment yet prevent child porn, you should logically conclude that all forms of pornography are socially unredeemable and harmful acts and pornography should be considered unprotected speech. Neither have any merit.
Guns are entirely different. Countless lives have been saved by guns despite the fact that many guns are also used to kill the innocent. It comes down to the hand the gun falls into. Thats a people problem not a gun problem.
You can't say the same for pornography of any kind. Pornography is inherently detrimental in its use. It offers no benefit, has no upside to counter its potential for harm.
People are also harmed in manufacturing porn. You can manufacture firearms all day long and literally nothing will happen to you.
When your best argument against guns is child pornography its time to re-evaluate your moral trajectory. If your conclusion is that we allow porn under the first amendment yet prevent child porn, you should logically conclude that all forms of pornography are socially unredeemable and harmful acts and pornography should be considered unprotected speech. Neither have any merit.
Guns are entirely different. Countless lives have been saved by guns despite the fact that many guns are also used to kill the innocent. It comes down to the hand the gun falls into. Thats a people problem not a gun problem.
You can't say the same for pornography of any kind. Pornography is inherently detrimental in its use. It offers no benefit, has no upside to counter its potential for harm.
People are also harmed in manufacturing porn. You can manufacture firearms all day long and literally nothing will happen to you.