Elites have alcohol problems too

Whenever you find yourself responding (or just tempted to respond) to a general claim with specific examples, you don't actually have an argument. I'm not going to make Cowen's point for him but it's fairly clear what he means:

> In part our guns problem is an alcohol problem. According to Mark Kleiman, half the people in prison were drinking when they did whatever they did.

Is it fair to say that elites don't have significant numbers of them imprisoned after alcohol-fueled crimes? It either is, or it isn't. And if you want to attack Cowen's position, this is how you do it. By showing that there is no significant difference.

Not with Charlie Sheen. Who's gonna be perfectly fine BTW because he has had one high-paying gig after another since he was... 20?

Rather wordy writeup on the use of double standards to excuse behaviour in one group which is not accepted in others. The 'elite' used to pride themselves on drinking like fishes while prohibition/temperance was seen as necessary for the lower orders. Or gambling, rich people are 'high rollers' while poor people waste money on scratch cards. And of course feminism, men are sexist bigots, while women are righting historical injustices. So yes, double standards, the only thing we all have in common.

I think he's just misunderstanding the paragraph. What the original writer meant was that there is a group of people who can handle [alcohol|firearms], and are therefore 'elite'. Poor choice of words maybe, but it makes much more sense in the context of the original article.

The addictions of "Elites" are treated in a much more functional manner. Not that they're anything but middle-to upper-middle class, but I note that none of the tech or software related gigs I apply for would dare drug test for fear of losing their productive employees. Executive and finance-related positions, similarly.

'Too'? How's that? Are they special in any way or different from other people?