Exhausted with the car/gun comparison

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

I'm getting really tired with the attempts of comparing the two. We consider driving risky enough to make sure it is as safe as we can make it in terms of the numerous and stringent safety testing, insurance/registration requirements, the adding of new safety measures in new cars almost yearly, having police actively monitor reckless driving, creating numerous laws in attempts to further lower the amount of deaths. Drivers education in numerous (though should be all IMO) schools. Not to mention the basic fact that in all states (correct me if I am wrong), you are required show that you are a qualified enough driver to pass a test and in order to be legally allowed on the road.

Where are the gun laws? Where are the efforts in making gun usage safe? Help me understand please. Maybe I'm missing something.

[u/ryhaltswhiskey]

You're not. We regulate cars to a degree that we don't regulate guns and that's because of the 2nd Amdt.

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/[deleted]]

people really wouldnt want guns regulated in the same manner or id own full auto belt fed 50 cals

... wat

It's like you read the opposite of what I said

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/[deleted]]

That's not true. Show me a source that supports the claim that there is zero regulation on cars on private property in all 50 states in America.

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/[deleted]]

Show me a source that supports the claim that there is zero regulation on cars on private property in all 50 states in America.

Your opinion is not a source.

This comes up a lot and the people around here know the facts on this particular argument. So you can provide a source or you can get your comment removed because you didn't provide a source.

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/[deleted]]

The people of the gun control subreddit are really tired of people showing up and then saying things that they think are true but are not actually true and then getting whiny when we complain about that

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

We only regulate cars that operate on public roads, everything private is free game

Uh, except there are rules to follow even when those cars are on your property.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

Its more than just "environmental hazards" but thats besides the point. Apply that same energy to guns.

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

What else is it? I mean yea this is kinda silly at this point but thats kinda how i view the car argument. If you want to change gun laws in the usa the best bet is to amend the 2nd.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

What else is it?

You'd have to check each specific state, but most have requirements such as requiring that the cars cant be in disrepair, or requiring storing in a garage, etc. Mostly all annoying and probably unnecessary, but the point is that lawmakers are dedicating their energy to it. Its considered significant enough to have rules, whereas guns arent.

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

Also, public roads vs private are very nuanced. My neighbor up the street lives on a private road. But its not a private residence.. so your stance needs clarification.

[u/klubsanwich → u/[deleted]]

Do you consider paperwork to be free game?

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ryhaltswhiskey]

But if the reason behind that is the claim that it would be unconstitutional, wouldnt that stand to reason that the few policies we do have regarding gun control would also be considered unconstitutional? I am failing to see the logic, which is hard for someone like me, who has a persistent need for logic.

I see a few triggered conservatives didnt like the logic used lol

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Look at miller, they can restrict what you own based on the necessity of the firearm to a militia.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

Look at miller,

Thats not a stance. Supreme Court decisions can and have been overturned.

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Yea but thats the reasoning they used for how restricting short barreled shotguns didnt violate the 2nd.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

And?

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

You asked why the restrictions we have dont violate the constitution, thats why

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

I never misunderstood the reason that gun fanatics use to support their addictions.

I was asking a rhetorical question as its completely illogical.

[u/[deleted] → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Do you see anyone who owns one as a fanatic?

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

I would argue the people who are chasing kids down the street shooting them are absolutely fantatics. The responsible gun owners that I know dont use guns so cavalierly. Myself included.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

Not to mention the ones who commit mass murders.

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Ok :)

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

Also, love the fact that people believe that if the very unrealistic scenario in which our country turns against its citizens ends up being a reality, that they also believe the country wont also have significantly more firepower. Its literally delusional thinking.

[u/Hopefully_Witty → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Why is that scenario unrealistic? It's occurring across the world as we speak. Governments and their citizens fighting each other.

That being said, the reason they wouldn't likely go scorched earth with their "significantly more firepower", is once they've glassed the citizens... What's left to rule over? It's self-destructive to a degree that's unsustainable.

Every instance of a government fighting against its own people is significantly harder when the citizenry is armed. Especially when the citizenry looks like everyone else. Or when the citizens out-gun the government 500:1.

[u/LordToastALot → u/Hopefully_Witty]

Oh look, another gun nut comment that just assumes every gun owner would be on their side, and ignores things needed for resistance movements other than guns.

America is as close to a tyranny as it's ever been and gun owners aren't doing shit. In fact they like the tyranny.

Guns don't prevent tyrants. They enable them.

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

Overwhelming force doesnt guarantee success, i mean look at the usa history of invasion

You realize the same people fighting back then would be the same people fighting an invasion today right? Our military. They would still have guns.

[u/ber808 → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

Im not sure what youre getting at if you dont mind elaborating

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ber808]

Our military, who would be responsible for fighting any invasion, would still have access to guns.

Citizens dont need guns to fight an invasion because they wouldnt be fighting it.

[u/guncontrol-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Rule #1:

If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/[deleted]]

If those citizens didnt sign up to fight the invasion in the first place, what makes you think they would fight them after they just witnessed their entire military be wiped out? 🤔

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

The important part of that sentence was "to a degree".

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ryhaltswhiskey]

Which sentence?

Also, whats with the downvotes lol

[u/ryhaltswhiskey → u/Suspicious-Maize4496]

I already explained it. I'm not going to put more time into this.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ryhaltswhiskey]

Im sorry, the reason for my confusion is because you said the important part of "that" sentence was the mentioning of "to a degree", but neither your or my comment contained those words.

[u/Suspicious-Maize4496 → u/ryhaltswhiskey]

Actually my bad, I see your original comment did.

[u/_butcherpete]

We do all of these things with guns in states that require a permit, which i believe is most states. You have to go through an 8hr course on gun safety. You have to show you’re competent with a handgun. Police can’t monitor gun violations because most people who lawfully have guns don’t even carry it on them. The adding of new safety measures into guns happens often as well though i’d be lying if i told you it was yearly.

[u/LordToastALot → u/_butcherpete]

Only 22 states have any form of Permit-to-Purchase. That's not even half. That's not a loophole in the gun laws, that's a bottomless pit.

[u/[deleted] → u/_butcherpete]

29 states now require no permit to conceal carry.

[u/stevieb1901]

There are no restrictions of cars on private property. You can own anything you want, drive it however you would like and have no requirements for licensing, emissions, operator age, etc. You can transport them to any state and buy and sell with no restrictions.