Forum Thread

cars and guns

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 8 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Some of the more zealous 2nd amendment folks have facetiously suggested that we ban cars because they kill people, but that is a false equivalency to guns.

    Cars are designed to provide transportation.

    Guns are designed to kill.

    The reason that auto deaths have gone down steadily since the peak year of 1972 is due to:

    (1) safer automobiles

    (2) better enforcement of drunk driving laws

    (3) better designed roads

    (4) all drivers are required to be licensed and insured *

    (5) drivers can lose their license to drive for various violations.

    In contrast, an individual who wants to buy a gun:

    (1) does not have to pass a background check to verify his eligibility to buy a gun at gun shows or in a private sale.

    (2) In most states, he is not required to go through training before buying a gun

    (3) he is not required to purchase insurance

    (4) red flag laws (which would take away guns from dangerous people) do not exist in many states.

    (5) in many states (like Arizona) are not even required to have a permit to own a bgun

    On top of that, gun manufactures (unlike car manufacturers) cannot be sued if their product causes injury or death.

    * The first state to issue a drivers license was New York, in 1901. It was not until 1959, that all states required driver's licenses, and for many years, many states did not even require drivers to go through an exam.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_licenses_in_the_United_States

    Supposedly, Mitch McConnell is suddenly interested in passing gun legislation- but don't hold your breath.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/us/politics/gun-background-checks.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Since most GOP members are immersed in the second amendment, I really don't see how they'll pass any new legislation, they'll claim it's a violation of a citizen's privacy to pass red flag laws.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    As I've said so many times; it says nowhere in the "second amendment" that "civilians" can own guns. It says "militia" can own guns. Thus hang all the lawyers who are complicit in all the killings. Amen
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I think the second amendment should either be abolished or amended itself, they did it before for prohibition, they can do it now for gun laws, but congress is too unwilling, they're afraid if they do, it'll affect their reelection chances.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The only thing that will stop this kind of mass shooting violence is removing all guns. Removing all guns would probably precipitate another kind of violence. Don't be reassured that the number of gun owners has gone down. It is probably a lot more than polling can account for.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The California Assembly on Monday sent a bill to Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk. The bill would expand Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPos), commonly referred to as red flag laws. As it currently stands, family members and law enforcement officials are able to petition the court to take away a person's firearms. The bill heading to Newsom's desk, if signed, would now allow employers, co-workers, and high school and college teachers and administrations to also petition a court, the Los Angeles Times reported.

    Seems like a sensible law to me, but the conservatives (see below) think it would be a "serious infringement of gun rights".

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/09/10/california-legislature-sends-bill-expanding-red-flag-laws-to-gov-newsom-n2552740

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    that guy in AZ Wrote:

    The California Assembly on Monday sent a bill to Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk. The bill would expand Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPos), commonly referred to as red flag laws. As it currently stands, family members and law enforcement officials are able to petition the court to take away a person's firearms. The bill heading to Newsom's desk, if signed, would now allow employers, co-workers, and high school and college teachers and administrations to also petition a court, the Los Angeles Times reported.

    Seems like a sensible law to me, but the conservatives (see below) think it would be a "serious infringement of gun rights".

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/09/10/california-legislature-sends-bill-expanding-red-flag-laws-to-gov-newsom-n2552740

    Arizona, Looking at all of this, then this country won't last with all these half ass measures. If you look at present at the whole picture of this country and what is going on, then forget it; it will become even worse than Venezuela if we don't watch out. Amen
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Both California and New York have recently passed what I would call "enhanced red flag" laws that allow more people to warn authorities about dangerous individuals.

    Beto O'Rourke, of course, is absolutely correct when he said that "weapons of war" have no place on our streets. Naturally, he got a DEATH THREAT from one of the state legislators in Texas, which he reported to the FBI.

    Another innovative approach is the program just introduced by Green Giant. For every semi-automatic weapon turned in, the company is offering 25 pounds of green beans. Gun owners who turned in multiple weapons could receive premium products like their Italian herb vegetable medley and fire-roasted sautéed zucchini.

    At press time, though, Green Giant had discontinued the program after receiving over 5 million death threats.

    As you might suspect, though, this story is from America's finest news source - The Onion.

    https://www.theonion.com/green-giant-offering-program-where-gun-owners-can-trade-1838097221