New pro-gun talking point…

While talking with an anti-gun colleague at work yesterday… they inevitably went to the old anti-gun talking point “We need to regulate guns the way that we regulate cars.”

To which I replied, ‘Thats a great idea! Why dont we also regulate all of the other rights outlined in the bill of rights the same way we regulate guns? Lets force people to pay a fee, get a background check, get a government issued license before we allow them to vote… to exercise free speech… maybe we should force people to get fingerprinted and put on a registry before we let them enjoy freedom of religion. Since abortion is now a “right found in the constitution” perhaps we should require people to go through a waiting period and a background check and pay a fee to have a license issued to them before they can go purchase an abortion. Maybe we should have red-flag laws in place so people lose their right to vote if we think they might vote for Trump in the next election.’

They didn’t have a clue what to do with that. Give it a try next time you are talking to an anti-gunner. It works.

  1. I’m all for treating firearms like cars. But, I don’t think anti-gun proponents realize what they’re talking about. They might want to be careful what they wish for.

    I can buy any car I want at any time and I can buy as many as I can afford. There is no waiting period nor is there government permission required to do so.

    – This would do away with all background checks and permits needed.

    There really isn’t a minimum age so long as I can pay although I may have to have a parent, guardian, or even a friend or total stranger to sign the contract for me.

    – This would get rid of the prohibition of straw purchases and age limits.

    I can buy any car I want to, it can be large or small, it can have a huge capacity for fuel of a limited tank it can have an economy engine or a racing engine. It can be very quiet or somewhat loud.

    – This gets rid of banning guns based on function, size, and magazine capacity. Machine guns could be legal along with suppressors; belt fed, 30 round magazines, and single shot would all be just fine.

    I can buy a car and use it without any government approvals necessary so long as I use it on private property. It’s none of the governments business what I have and drive on my own property. In fact, I don’t need to have the government’s permission to use any car I want to at any time unless I take it out onto the public roads. If I have a concealed carry license that license MUST be honored everywhere in the country, no questions asked.

    – Those who want to possess and carry any weapon can do so, anywhere, any time. No restrictions.

    Also, the law permits any vehicle to be used in the event of an emergency, even if you have no license to use the vehicle, the vehicle has no insurance, and isn’t registered. A person can drive an unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured vehicle on public roads if it is to save a life. That would be the same with my firearm. Neighbor lady going into labor? Anyone, even an 9 year old, can drive any car, of any type, at any time, in response to that emergency. The same will be true of weapons.

    In fact, the whole preclusion of self-defense as a foundation for the possession of a weapon indicates its use would only be used in such an emergency. If I do need it – it would be an emergency.

    Firearm insurance is irrelevant. Just as in automobile insurance, plans do not cover liability and loss if the item is used in the commission of a crime. Criminals will not be carrying insurance, nor would it cover their actions. Many people already buy and own guns illegally without license or registration. Adding the cost of insurance would further discourage honest gun ownership. That would make matters worse, not better. And is it so obvious that all guns are harmful to others and that gun ownership should be made more expensive to every owner?

    What is really behind the call for liability insurance is the natural urge to make it harder for people to own guns. Such a law might do some good if it made dishonest and violent people less likely to own guns. But liability insurance makes gun ownership more expensive for honest, law-abiding people while encouraging dishonest and dangerous people to own guns in ways we cannot see. Further, the number of injuries and deaths as a result of negligence or accidents are so inconsequential it has an incredibly low cost/benefit ratio.

    But, as far as treating my firearms like a car? Sounds like a great plan. Let’s do it.

    1. Yes, you could get a manual or fully auto firearm, just as you can with a car.

      As mentioned, you don’t need a license or registration or insurance to operate a car on private property. Only in emergency situations do most people use a firearm on public property, unless they are hunting. So if you are only carrying it, like a truck that tows cars (like a NASCAR trailer) you aren’t operating it on public land, just transporting it.

  2. If 2A doesn’t apply to modern autloading firearms, then neither does the 1st apply to anything apart the spoken word and products of a colonial-era printing press. Electrostatic and laser printers and all forms of electronic media need not apply.

  3. You can narrow your response….how about a background check and fingerprinting before you are allowed to buy an electronic device…Ipad, laptop, cell phone? Since these devices are all used in crime, in particular human trafficking, computer identity theft……how do we know who is buying a computer and wether they are banned from having one? Those involved in Child Abuse are often banned from owning and accessing the internet….how about before you are allowed to access the internet, you must get a full background check, and fingerprinting? If it saves one life…right?

Comments are closed.