• Tank

    Good analogy. It would surely keep the under 21 street racers away because everyone knows their cars are always 100% DOT legal, and they always abide by the laws, keep it under the speed limit, no reckless driving, no drinking or drugs influencing their actions, etc. just like the gun laws always keep criminals from harming/killing people… Oh that’s right, the criminals don’t care about laws, no matter what tool of destruction, including their own feet, head, hands, they use to harm people…

  • e111w

    So many seem to miss this matter of FACT: Ownership of firearms is a right given us by our Constitution. Neither motor vehicle ownership nor the operation thereof is a right. I’m rather certain that all states’ drivers (exam) manuals will contain language about driving priveleges. I’m a bit concerned that we might be up against it where matters of visiual acuity, criminal history and mental statefor example, are thrown into the mix. Vision (corrected) applies to driving and should be a requirement for firearms use. Criminal history already applies to firearms use/ownership. Their is justifiable arguement that enforcement and applicable penalties need improving here. The mental bit is dicey territory – one must ACTUALLY be KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THE SUBJECT to properly address it. On balance, ANTIDEPRESSANT meds help far, far more than they harm. For a MINOR number, antidepressants can be contradictory. A significant number of these result from misapplication of types by prescribers (and/or) any prescription at all. PSYCHOTROPIC meds are another matter. Much more often, individuals who may be candidates for treatment with psychotropics are behaviorally aberrant – up front. If a category is to be seriously considered as criteria for possessing – or not possessing a gun – this is the place to start.

  • watchdogman

    Maybe some elected official will have the guts to actually introduce such legislation. Then it would be exciting as hell to watch…Of course those that are sane and responsible will be grandfathered but also they must own a gun to be grandfathered.

    • hockeydad

      I don’t remember when but back in the 70’s didn’t Jerry Brown say something to the fact, people don’t need cars we have public transportation…..

      Environmentalists what this because it will control via “Global Warming”

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.finis Joe Finis Sr.

    Poor analogy. Cars are needed to get to work, school, stores, etc. Not a good argument at all. The 2nd Amendment should stand on it’s own without comparison to mundane everyday objects. If anything, compare guns to other weapons such as knives, etc.

  • Sandra Lee Smith

    All cars are lethal weapons; and should be much more strictly regulated than they are! Children who do not demonstrate sufficient maturity, regardless of chronological age, should NOT be “licensed” to handle them, seniors should have to demonstrate both mental and physical competence to continue using them, etc. There are far too many “licensed” drivers who have NO business behind a wheel, and people DIE at a staggering rate because of it; cars are far greater hazards to the public health and safety than guns are!

  • Hockeydad

    Quite frankly isn’t that the whole purpose. It started with cigarettes to prepare people for the government restricting personal choice.

    Health benefits is always the excuse, flawed science and disingenuous excuses operate on the week minded.

  • Miguel

    The Constitution does not GIVE us the right to keep and bear arms; it RECOGNIZES that right as an existing right and limits the power of the government to infringe on it. But if cars are to be regulated like guns snatchers want tp regulate guns, military-style cars, such as Jeeps and Humvees, should be banned outright. So should small pick-up trucks since they are used with mounted machine guns in African insurgencies. Windows on all vehicles should be permanently shut since they facilitate drive-by shootings. Similarly, motorcycles should be banned because they can be used for drive-by shootings and are very effective for getaways. Fuel capacity of all vehicles should be severely limited since a car with a full gas tank is just an incendiary bomb. Also, a large fuel tank makes it easy to transport gas to a location where it can be pumped out of the tank for some criminal purpose. Possession of more than 2 gallons of fuel outside of a vehicle’s fuel tanks should be made a crime punishable by imprisonment. That would make us all safer, just as gun control legislation would (i.e., not at all safer, but much less free!)

  • DEfromDC

    We need to regulate politicians they are the real assault weapons. They continue to assault people’s rights and attack the Constitution. They are gunning down the truth like they are using high capacity clips with all the lies and misconceptions they are shooting through the press. They are rifling through our lives like never before.

  • DEfromDC

    Congress and the President have caused the death of more Americans than anything else since this country was founded. Millions have died needlessly because DDT was regulated/banned. Wars (“politics by another name” San Su) have killed millions. Democrats have been in power for most of the war and are thus responsible for the military style weapons they want to eliminate. Have there been any thing restricted by the government that didn’t cause deaths or significant money?

The latest from GirlsJustWannaHaveGuns.com