A comparison between prostitution and gun control

[Dervel]

We all in the UK are willing to deny law abiding citizens who would otherwise own a handgun and never use them on another person the right to own them for fear of the violent and disturbed few that would. I think with the tacit understanding that no matter what regulation/ safeguards a government put in would in some circumstances fail.

Isn’t it somewhat the same with prostitution? I mean I’m all for choice and whilst I would have no quarrel with any individual sex worker who did it freely and without coercion. Can’t it also be said because of the occasions where women are exploited, broken and harmed the buying (though not the sale) of sex should be illegal too?

1000 people could own guns but that 1 lunatic makes it not worth it. So too hundreds of non injurious commercial sex transactions could take place where no harm results, but for that one woman where it does means we can’t have it legalised?

Does that make sense? And am I being logically consistent?

I don't think the analogy works- certainly not for me.

We have very strict gun control in the UK and low gun crime rates. The vast majority of gun crime is from unlicensed weapons and weapons which could not be legally licensed. There is a small risk of suicide in the farming community (depression, financial difficulties, lone working and access to a gun is a bad combination) But the system on the whole works.

I think your argument could be used to support legal brothels, pimping etc- "look guns are really bad but as long as we have proper controls, rules and risk assessment it can work". And I do not support that.

I’m talking non single shot handguns, or automatic rifles specifically as they are small, easily concealable and can inflict many casualties in relatively short spaces. They are completely illegal in this country they aren’t even regulated just no you can’t have one. Anyone who does posses one is in violation of the law. I’m just thinking of treating punters the same way.

The two things are apples and oranges as far as I can see.

There are a few legitimate reasons for a civilian to have the right to own a gun, such cases can be licensed.

There's no legitimate reason to need to buy sex that I can think of.

No one has died from sex.

No one has died from sex.

Many women have died as the result of sex.

The significant component is choice we all accept a general restriction of the ownership of deadly weapons, but why not paid sex?

Because guns can kill innocent men, women and children, not merely women?

I'm afraid this thread is losing me. I agree with Eccles it's apples and something that isn't even a fruit.

I think we mostly agree guns are bad (except for specific legitimate uses) and buying sex is bad, but it's not an illuminating analogy.

I think OP's point would work if nobody at all could legally own a gun in the UK
then, the analogy would be-
even though the vast majority of people could own a gun and not use it to harm anyone, we accept this restriction on our liberty because of the risk of harm caused by the minority of people who would use a gun to cause harm
so,
even though the buying/selling of sex would in the vast majority of cases not harm anyone, we (should) accept this restriction on our liberty (to buy/sell sex) because of the risk of harm caused in the minority of cases
It's a counter argument to the 'why shouldn't women be free to sell sex, if that's what they want to do?- because even though in MOST cases it may be harmless, in some cases it won't, so we won't allow it at all
The more I spell it out, the more I think it's a rubbish argument

Thanks newtlover. That would make sense if we banned all guns - but we don't. We have a system which on the whole permits those with a genuine need to own a gun to do so lawfully and peacefully.

To carry the analogy through illegal weapons are the gun equivalent of the horrors that go on in the streets of Leeds. A nice, cosy brothel run by a nice matronly woman with lovely, kind bouncers is (aside from being fictitious) the prostitution version of successful gun control.

I hope I'm not setting up an argument the pro punters bunch can use.

I don't think we even need to try to draw an analogy between the two things

Access to guns for other than legitimate purposes and the the purchase of sexual access to people should both be illegal

DpWm
No one has died from sex.

Every two minutes a woman or a girl on this planet dies giving birth.

30 an hour
720 a day
262,800 a year

The leading cause of death for females of reproductive age (15-44) worldwide are AIDS-related illnesses.

Add to that countless women and girls who are raped and die as a consequence, who fall pregnant and die from back alley abortions, FGM-victims who die because of injuries caused during subsequent sex, children forced into marriage who die because of injuries caused by having sex with their much older husbands, women and girls who are killed by those buying their bodies for sex from pimps and sex traffickers.

Throughout human history, billions of women and girls have died from sex.

Yes women die in childbirth.
I meant no one dies from sex and sex alone. Prostitutes tend to use contraception. Not all sex leads to pregnancy. Obviously people die during sex from acts that are not the sex itself, etc etc.

rape as a weapon of war

Criminals don't recognise Gun Laws.

They don't apply for certificates, agree to inspections of their gun storage facilities or give evidence of their good character, with references. They don't provide proof of their identity or a utility bill showing their address or a debit card linked to a personal account.

Gun crimes in the UK (unlike the USA) are committed with untraceable weapons purchased from other criminals.

Prostituted people are human beings. The purchaser cannot know of her/his background and whether or not s/he has been groomed, trafficked, coerced or is vulnerable through addictions/mental health/poverty issues.