Policy Mic has pointed out that more states require waiting periods for abortions than waiting periods for guns. There are currently 26 states, such as Texas and Virginia, that require a woman to wait before getting an abortion. In contrast, there are only 11 states that require people to wait before buying a gun. These states include California and Massachusetts.
These statistics highlight how much of an impact politics can have on a person’s ability to perform a legal activity. Getting an abortion and buying a gun are both perfectly legal in every state, but pro-gun control and pro-life politics have affected how easy it is to do both.
What makes this comparison so striking is that abortion and guns both provoke debate about life, death and murder. Pro-life advocates argue that restricting abortions save lives, and gun control proponents argue that restricting guns save lives.
Unsurprisingly, the states that require a waiting period for abortions tend to lean to the right, and states that require a waiting period for guns tend to lean to the left.
What is so ironic about these waiting periods is that they are intended to have a totally different effect. The purpose of waiting periods for abortions is to increase emotion and make would-be mothers more attached to their unborn fetus. The purpose of waiting periods for guns is to get rid of emotion and prevent impulsive people from buying a gun in a moment of anger of depression.
A study in Texas concluded that the waiting period had an intended effect with abortions with as many as one-third of women saying that the waiting period had a negative emotional impact. Statistics about gun waiting periods are scarce, but the data suggests that forcing people to wait for guns reduces the number of gun-related suicides.
What are your thoughts about these two controversial waiting periods? Which need to stay and which need to go?
Source: Policy Mic