America's flamethrower debate

 

Imagine that there's been an epidemic of arson in this country for the past couple of decades.

Now imagine that this is the national conversation around it:

Person A: Huh, most of the worst fires were started by people with a "Lite-em-up" flamethrower. We should ban those flamethrowers.

Person B: That won't help, an arsonist would just find a different flamethrower.

Person A: Okay, then let's ban all flamethrowers.

Person B: No way. If we ban flamethrowers, arsonists will just use cigarette lighters, and then you'll want to ban those too. 

Person A: That's... not what I proposed. I know that a person CAN commit arson with a lighter, it's just a lot easier to do with a flamethrower. 

Person B: There are lots of law-abiding people with flamethrowers. Why should they be punished for the behavior of a few arsonists?

Person A: Why... why the fuck does anyone need a flamethrower?

Person B: I use it to set fires in my fireplace.

Person A: Overkill much? Why not just use a lighter?

Person B: Also, I might need it to protect myself from someone else with a flamethrower. The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a flamethrower is a good guy with a flamethrower.

Person A: ... Maybe you wouldn't need to, if it wasn't so easy for the bad guy to get a flamethrower?

Person B: Criminals don't obey laws, they'll just get a flamethrower anyway.

Person A: We could at least make it a lot harder for them to get the flamethrowers, though? After all, most of these arsonists aren't people connected to the criminal underworld and able to get a friend of a friend to hook them up... they're loners who buy a flamethrower legally or take a legally owned flamethrower from their parents' house.

Person B: If they're determined enough, they'll still find a way, and I'll still need a flamethrower to stop them.

Person A: Whatever, we're not getting anywhere with this option. Can we at least make it harder for people to get flamethrowers?

Person B: The flamethrower isn't the problem, it's mental health.

Person A: ... It's not, but assuming you're right can we have more funding for mental health?

Person B: No.

Person A: Could we at least make a law that says anyone who's been showing warning signs of pyromania, or threatening arson, will get their flamethrower taken away?

Person B: No.

Person A: Can we at least have stronger background checks to determine whether someone can have one, and make those checks universal?

Person B: No, I need to be able to buy or sell used flamethrowers without having to wait for some slow government bureaucracy to do the check.

Person A: You fucking WHAT????? ...Okay, okay, this is me taking a deep breath... What if law-abiding flamethrower owners are required to secure their flamethrower, and are held liable if someone else commits arson with their flamethrower because it wasn't secured properly?

Person B: No.

Person A: So maybe we should do SOMETHING to make it harder for angry or unstable people to get a flamethrower?

Person B: There's already plenty of regulations on the books, we need to enforce the laws we already have.

Person A: They clearly aren't enforceable though, not when they can vary from state to state and even county to county and you won't even allow a registration process so we can keep track of who owns them and when they change hands. 

Person B: The flamethrower isn't the problem, it's violent movies and video games that glorify flamethrowers.

Person A: ... Japan and Australia and Canada and all of Western Europe have those movies and games too, but they don't have anything like our levels of arson.

Person B: So it's not the flamethrowers, it's the culture.

Person A: Okay, but it's a culture that flamethrower owners have created and sustained. Like, you guys are the ones who are always posing for pictures with your flamethrowers, have collections of flamethrowers, have magazines dedicated to how awesome and powerful flamethrowers make you.

Person B: I have a constitutional right to a flamethrower! The Founding Fathers said so.

Person A: The Founding Fathers only had matches, tinder boxes, and primitive cigarette lighters. They didn't have flamethrowers. It seems unlikely that they foresaw a world in which everyone would have flamethrowers.

Person B: They made fire accessible to everyone as a safeguard against government tyranny. If soldiers have access to flamethrowers, we need to have access to them too.

Person A: ... you're planning to take on the military and the police, who have TANKS, with your flamethrower? Also, I thought you keep telling me to support the troops and the police, why do you collect flamethrowers for the purpose of killing them?

Person B: You keep telling me the police aren't trustworthy, why aren't you stockpiling flamethrowers to fight them?

Person A: Because it wouldn't be effective, they'd kill me long before I was in range. And in countries that ban flamethrowers, the police don't carry flamethrowers because they don't need them, overall arson rates are practically zero and the police almost never immolate someone with a flamethrower. But since you won't consider that option, can we get back to the idea of making it harder for dangerous people to get flamethrowers?

Person B: No, you already said you want to ban flamethrowers so now I don't trust you to write any regulations at all. People who don't understand flamethrowers shouldn't be regulating them.

Person A: Okay, maybe YOU could write some regulations that would make it less likely for these things to keep happening?

Person B: Sure. Here's a bill that would allow everyone in the country to carry a concealed flamethrower wherever they like, including in schools. That way the bad guys won't dare use 'em because they know the good guys will take them out.

Person A: You think the way to have less arson is MORE flamethrowers? What the actual fuck?

Person B: You think the way to have less arson is to take flamethrowers from law-abiding citizens?

Person A: Why would a law-abiding citizen need... Look, can we at least agree that we should do SOMETHING to make it harder for dangerous people to get flamethrowers?

Person B: More people die from car accidents than flamethrowers every year, do you think that more regulations on cars would fix that?

Person A: Firstly - yes, we literally regulate who can and can't own a car because that decreases the number of casualties. Secondly - tell me the last time someone with a car ran over 19 children in a classroom and I'll start talking about changing the laws around car ownership, yes.

Person B: You can take my flamethrower from my cold, dead hands.

Person A: You ... are sounding less and less like someone who should be trusted with a flamethrower, to be honest.

Person B: Well, I sure am glad that I voted for pro-flamethrower candidates and they have a disproportionate amount of power in our government, otherwise you'd be taking away my cigarette lighter.

Person A: What the hell is WRONG with you?

Person B: So much for the tolerant left.

COUNTRY: *Continues burning*