Guns as Cars
Everytown USA ran a "If only guns were as regulated as cars" meme that appeals to the Fool or Fraud.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2022-05-29 |
Basics[edit | edit source]
Every one of their points only appeals to idiots who can't think it through, and NONE of those would have stopped a recent mass shooting. And that's what this is about. Are they using a mass shooting or school shooting as an excuse to further their agenda of harassing gun owners and making them harder to get? Or are they sincerely looking for things that might help?
Those that break the laws on murder, aren't going to pay attention to minor licensing. We know this because the majority of guns used in murders are illegally obtained, so none of these could help.
Are guns as regulated as cars? Far more so. Anyone that doesn't know this is a fool. Anyone that does and pretends they aren't is a liar. Period.
Examples:[edit | edit source]
- Titling: You can buy a car without going through an FFL. You CAN register a car with the state, but if you're keeping it on private property you don't have to. (Racecars aren't, etc).
- Driver Training: Do you have to get driver training to buy a car? Nope. You might need it for a driver's license -- just like you need one to get a CCW. But not for buying the car.
- Written Test: nope. You don't need one to buy a car. You do need one for getting a CCW.
- Practical Test: nope. You don't need one to buy a car. You do need one for getting a CCW.
- Health Requirements: nope. Again for drivers license, and CCW. If you can't see enough to shoot, then you can't get a CCW. Just like a car.
- Liability: again, only for driving on public roads. Public (and most private) gun ranges carry insurance for you.
- Renewals and Inspection at Intervals: for the driver you need to keep paying extortion money to the state to use public roads. Just like you need to renew your CCW. But CCW testing and cost is far higher than drivers license. (I got fingerprinted, the test+training took most of a day, and I did it in 3 states). For the vehicle, you do for public roads. For the gun you don't. But if a gun doesn't function right when needed, you're 99% only a danger to yourself, and any gun owner does a lot more inspection of their guns before use than their cars: you clean them more, disassemble and re-assemble, etc.
Explain to me how you getting a prostate exam and passing the health requirements is going to stop a mass shooting or school shooter?
All the recent mass shooters were proficient with guns and could easily pass practical tests.
Mass shooters come in 2 flavors: (a) those that got their guns legally so these requirements couldn't help. (b) those that gun their guns illegally, so these requirements couldn't help.
And you think someone who cares about mass murder is going to get/keep up their liability insurance? "Sure, I'm going a suicide run to go out in a blaze of glory, but first let me just call and make sure my insurance is up-to-date".
The only things these laws can be used for, is to harass legal gun owners and drive up their costs. As leftists have done in leftist states. So if leftist / gun controllers aren't reasonable, then their laws aren't reasonable. None of these is "reasonable" gun control, since anyone that can reason, knows they wouldn't fix the problem they claim to help with.
Reality[edit | edit source]
| 🗒️ Note: |
|---|
| Licensing is where the government takes your liberty away, and agrees to lease it back to you as the oldest protection racket in the book.
I ask the gun licensing fanatics if they support at least the same requirements for Abortion, Voting, or Free Speech. And they are shocked and say it isn't the same thing, or change the subject. Yeah, it's not the same thing: abortion should have stiffer requirements as your asking to end a life. Voting is the foundation of our Democracy and if we don't have faith in the validity of it, than our country ceases to be a country or a peaceful place. Both are far more important. Abuse of speech and ideas kills more people per year and is far more dangerous. Again, any depth, and they attack or distract, because if they could admit the point and grow as humans, they couldn't remain good progressives or gun controllers. |
- States already do this - California (New York, New Jersey, etc) already has most of these. And they've tried for all of them. They are either unconstitutional or ineffective.
- They already proved they aren't reasonable - those states do NOT have lower murder or mass murder rates. And all those requirements have been abused. They don't really do what they claim to help. And they have been abused to harass law-abiding citizens. So why would we trust them more, when they've already proven untrustworthy?
- ID/Privacy - California, NY, NJ have leaked lists of CCW's or others that "registered" by "accident", a couple times. Imagine you're a woman, hiding from a stalker, and you get a CCW and a restraining order, and New York releases your name and address for the stalker to find you and their activists to harass you. Yeah, that happened. So none of their fucking business. 4th/5th amendment, go the fuck away!
- Abuse - they forgot things like waiting periods (which they also throw in). But if they cared about the safety and not harassing people, then common sense would apply. You'd say, if you already had a cooling off period / waiting period on a gun, then it wouldn't apply to your 5th gun or your 20th, right? It's not like you couldn't kill people with the first 19 guns. A waiting period should only apply to the first gun. But it doesn't. The same with a lot of these tests. You know guns and got a CCW. In Free America, that lets you fast track purchase. (You've given finger prints, background checks, trianing, etc: here's your new gun). In places that advocate for strict licensing, they do the opposite, and make you take all the tests and pay all the licensing/registration again, every time. It's a harassment scheme, not a safety one.
- The People - discuss the issue with the people that advocate for it. Are they honest people, willing to concede points? Or are they hopolophobes that just want to put their ego/feelings above other people's rights? They will do mental gymnastics to justify their position, and ignore the risks/consequences to others? Narcisists, leftists, authoritarians.
- Hardening Schools - one of the simplest test here is ask a basic question that would help more than licensing. Can we harden schools and put good security processes in place? Why have Democrats obstructed that for 40 years? If they don't support something that would obviously help more, and they can't concede a truth like Democrats have obstructing helping, because the agenda isn't to save kids lives, but to take gun owners liberty, then they aren't up for an adult discussion on the topic. It's not about reasonable gun safety, it's about their feelings and they resent gun owners liberty.
- Background - if they claim they are a conservative/independent, or gun owner and on your side, check out their bonafides. The left believes the ends justifies the means, and false flag. "I'm one of you" because they care about consensus and think you do to. So while I'm not for ad hominem'ing a source because they disagree with it, I do go with "trust but verify" and making sure they're not lying. If they'd lie to you about their background, well you know what kind of person you're starting with. And it's not an honest, objective person trying to get to the truth or save lives.
- Hardening Schools - one of the simplest test here is ask a basic question that would help more than licensing. Can we harden schools and put good security processes in place? Why have Democrats obstructed that for 40 years? If they don't support something that would obviously help more, and they can't concede a truth like Democrats have obstructing helping, because the agenda isn't to save kids lives, but to take gun owners liberty, then they aren't up for an adult discussion on the topic. It's not about reasonable gun safety, it's about their feelings and they resent gun owners liberty.
🔗 More
| |
| |
