>>I like the remark from bill where government intervention did help to reduce the number of drunk drivers.
>>
>It worked here because the prevailing opinion was that drunk driving should be stopped. That didn't happen overnight. MADD and other organizations hammered away at it for decades until law enforcement agencies took existing laws seriously and public opinion eventually shifted. We were decades behind Europe in that regard.
>When we visited my wife's family in Bavaria in 1973 they were already appointing designated drivers - and those people love beer.
>
>Michael Bloomberg's attack on smoking in restaurants and bars in NYC is another example of law finally catching up with the prevailing public opinion. It was controversial when he did it ,but I don't know anyone who seriously wants to go back to allowing smoking in public places.
>
>Bloomberg's equally noticeable failure to limit the size of sugar drinks fizzled (pun) because prevailing opinion was against him on that issue.
>
>Gun laws will change when the prevailing public opinion demands that they change. We are nowhere near that point.

90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks - most want stricter guns laws, and most do NOT want bans. However the NRA has lobbyist so we're all screwed it does not matter what the people want.