Re: Are you for gun control? Why or Why not?
Why does a 4'8 cute-as-a-button girl weighing as much as my thigh need to drive a double-axle Ford truck with an engine that must have come out of a diesel locomotive? I'm exaggerating a tad on the engine - but I've seen it.
Originally Posted by Black Adam
All hell would break loose if we actually required people to justify their vehicle purchases or enacted a law that imposed a speed limit in the car's electronics system (that can be done, quite easily, by the way). Why, pray tell, does anyone need a vehicle that can break 85 miles an hour?
Think of the costs these things impose. Criminals and heavy-footed fools can fly down the interstate at over 100 miles an hour... and if the police want a hope in the world of catching them - they need to have vehicles that can travel a healthy margin faster... those are high-performance vehicles that come at a high cost to state and local governments. Not only that - but the faster vehicles are going, the more likely traffic fatalities and injuries are (increasing costs to insurance and medical systems that are now being propped up by the government, thus justifying laws to reduce government expenses... which is why I'm against government involvement in those sectors, but I can't deny the reality that ruining everyone's fun would reduce costs).
An "AR" - or, in my case, the 6.8mm ACR I am trying to get an order for, is no different than a performance vehicle that people are allowed to buy. It's blatantly capable of doing many illegal things, and less than 0.1% of everyone who owns one has a legitimate -need- for it.
But I've seen Spyders and other such sports cars being passed on the highway by some Prius in a hurry. Hell - I've seen them backing traffic up on the highway, before, going under the speed limit (obviously not because they lack the capability).
Likewise, I can keep my fancy rifle stored away with all of its unnecessary, excessive features, and use it responsibly at a firing range or in proper hunting settings.
Unless you honestly want to sit here and try to defend the common sense of people buying cars that go fast enough to cause cars traveling in the same direction (and lane) to quite literally explode from the force of an impact, alone. And then try and say: "It's their right to buy a car..." - when the Constitution says, quite plainly, that the right to bear arms shall not be abridged. That means that right will not be shortened, curtailed, trimmed, slimmed, or any other synonym you can fit in there. It would require an amendment to the Constitution to pass more restrictive bans (technically, the previous 'assault weapons ban' was unconstitutional and lay outside the authority of the office signing it).
If you chuckle-heads get to take away "assault weapons" - I get to take away sports cars. Any car caught speeding on the highway will be immediately engaged by Cobra or Apache gunships - a single AGM-144 Hell Fire will permanently render the vehicle inoperable. The police force can be equipped with Corollas or something and just defer high-speed chases to Predator drones. The driver poses an imminent danger to the U.S. and qualifies under the current drone policy constructed by this presidential administration for elimination by precision ordnance.
Hey, if I have to live in a draconian fascist world... I at least want to have some fun killing people doing blatantly stupid things. Don't take that away from me, too.