4 ms·

I'm not sure what your point is, because cars are already very heavily regulated? To drive a car you need to pass a competency test, as well as be insured agai

by lutze 14y ago

I'm not sure what your point is, because cars are already very heavily regulated? To drive a car you need to pass a competency test, as well as be insured against accidents. Your right to drive can also be revoked if at any time you demonstrate that you can't operate one safely. So uh, yeah. I agree with you, lets do guns like cars!

eitland 14y ago
Totally agree. Now we're talking : )
InclinedPlane 14y ago
Driving cars on public roads is heavily regulated. Buying and owning cars is almost entirely unregulated, it doesn't require a license or insurance, so long as it is only driven on private property.
harshreality 14y ago
That's extending the analogy to false extremes. Any public use or brandishing of firearms, other than pursuant to self defense/defense of others, is a criminal act (with obvious exceptions like public ranges, public uninhabited land depending on State law, etc.) [note: visibility does not imply brandishing, in the case of open carry]
yummyfajitas 14y ago
If we regulate guns like cars, then: Anyone who passes a simple safety test (simple enough that the bulk of the population has little problem with it) can purchase a firearm and use it (subject to safety regulations) in public. With or without a license you can own and use a gun on private property. There are certain quality regulations on cars/guns which apply to using them outside private property (i.e., if it's likely to burst into flames, you can't take it onto public roads). There is no federal regulation, except for rules saying that a license in one state is valid in all other states (i.e., a Texas CCW license works in NY). This sounds like exactly what the NRA regularly lobbies for. The only people who will argue against your proposal are gun control advocates (e.g., Bloomberg).
- lutze 14y ago
  I think you might be taking my analogy a little far there. I wasn't suggesting a straight find/replace of car with firearm...
  - yummyfajitas 14y ago
    I was just pointing out what regulating guns like cars actually means. If you actually don't want to regulate guns like cars, but instead want far more draconian regulations, why not just clearly state that?

by lutze 14y ago

eitland 14y ago

Totally agree. Now we're talking : )

InclinedPlane 14y ago

Driving cars on public roads is heavily regulated. Buying and owning cars is almost entirely unregulated, it doesn't require a license or insurance, so long as it is only driven on private property.

harshreality 14y ago

That's extending the analogy to false extremes. Any public use or brandishing of firearms, other than pursuant to self defense/defense of others, is a criminal act (with obvious exceptions like public ranges, public uninhabited land depending on State law, etc.) [note: visibility does not imply brandishing, in the case of open carry]

yummyfajitas 14y ago

If we regulate guns like cars, then: Anyone who passes a simple safety test (simple enough that the bulk of the population has little problem with it) can purchase a firearm and use it (subject to safety regulations) in public. With or without a license you can own and use a gun on private property. There are certain quality regulations on cars/guns which apply to using them outside private property (i.e., if it's likely to burst into flames, you can't take it onto public roads). There is no federal regulation, except for rules saying that a license in one state is valid in all other states (i.e., a Texas CCW license works in NY). This sounds like exactly what the NRA regularly lobbies for. The only people who will argue against your proposal are gun control advocates (e.g., Bloomberg).

lutze 14y ago
I think you might be taking my analogy a little far there. I wasn't suggesting a straight find/replace of car with firearm...
- yummyfajitas 14y ago
  I was just pointing out what regulating guns like cars actually means. If you actually don't want to regulate guns like cars, but instead want far more draconian regulations, why not just clearly state that?