posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 04:54 PM
Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
reply to post by oper8zhin
If the said alcohol was being forced down the necks of the dead then I would say yes.
So are you saying that all of those British deaths resulted from alcohol being "poured down peoples throats" and therefore the reason why you would
ban it ONLY for that reason??? All of them deaths occured in Britan from people having alcohol "forced down their throats"????
What about an intoxicated driver crashing into an innocent family on the roadways, and KILLING THEM ALL?? Or something such as an intoxicated madman
going around with a KNIFE slaughtering dozens of people over there because of alcohol. Alcohol that these morons poured with his OWN HANDS down their
OWN THROAT. It doesnt take someone else pouring it down a persons throat, these deaths result from them drinking it themselves. Do you see how silly
your logic is?? You are clearly AVOIDING the question.
So since you will only ban alcohol in Britain if someone was "forcing it down their throats", well maybe you think we should BAN HANDS AND THROATS
There are million more ways alcohol can RUIN PEOPLES LIVES without it being "poured down their throats". You are being a HYPOCRITE. You wont agree
to BAN ALCOHOL IN BRITAIN even in the face of SO MANY DEATHS, but yet at the same time suggest firearms be banned in America over rare shooting
events. THAT MAKES YOU A HYPOCRITE.
edit on 14-12-2012 by oper8zhin because: (no reason given)