Lets treat cars and guns exactly alike; Reigster/License/Insurance mandates!

[OKTexas]

Sure just as soon as you buy an insurance policy to insure you dispose of the CFL light bulbs in your home, that mercury is dangerous shit ya know. Do you really want to take the crap out to the ultimate conclusion.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Car insurance sure seems to work just fine. People drive a bit safer. And most buy insurance. The cost of not doing so is too much to risk. And thats the point.

Car insurance is a legalized racket, nothing more.

 

[RDD_1210]

When the Constitution was written, "well-regulated" meant properly functioning. It had nothing to do with nanny-state meddling that modern regulation encompasses.

Link?

Or are you your own source?

 

[alan1]

Threads merged.

 

[eflatminor]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

Actually, we don't. The States (not the Feds) may require insurance to operate a vehicle ON A PUBLIC ROAD. You don't need a license or insurance to buy a vehicle or to operate one on your own property.

Therefore, by your own reasoning, the Federal government should have NO involvement in the individual right to bear arms (or require insurance) but states are free to require a conceal carry license for firearms in public places.

Works for me.

 

[bucs90]

Yes it does. An individual's right to bear arms can not be infringed because a well regulated milita is necessary for secure State.

Each state addresses the regulation of its respective militia.

My state does in its Constitution

Somehow you think no regulation = well regulated.

Nope. My state has formal militia and firearms regulations.

Oh.

Well...the state can NOT do anything that is un-Constitutional. Thats law. Yep. If it violates the Constitution, then the state, county, or city cant do it. Not even the campus police can!!!

Which means....if it is legal for your state to do that...then it is legal for the Feds to do it.

Ah. Interesting, right?

 

[BOBO]

...welcome you into their arm$!!!

 

[OODA_Loop]

Which means....if it is legal for your state to do that...then it is legal for the Feds to do it.

Ah. Interesting, right?

No your assertion is patently retarded and void of any concept of the 10th Amendment assignment of powers.

 

[boedicca]

When the Constitution was written, "well-regulated" meant properly functioning. It had nothing to do with nanny-state meddling that modern regulation encompasses.

Link?

Or are you your own source?

It's sad the lack of basic knowledge displayed by the Moonbats on this board (and elsewhere).

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

Meaning of the phrase "well-regulated"

 

[cutter]

Nothing in the Constitution about your right to a car SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When the Constitution was written, "well-regulated" meant properly functioning. It had nothing to do with nanny-state meddling that modern regulation encompasses.

Link?

Or are you your own source?

It's sad the lack of basic knowledge displayed by the Moonbats on this board (and elsewhere).

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

Meaning of the phrase "well-regulated"

He already knows this, it has been explained to him and other's like him many times.

 

[Stephanie]

How bout this? Treat guns exactly like cars; no worse, no better.

To carry a gun anywhere outside your home, you must:

1- Have a license. If you drive a car without license, you go to jail. Lets make it the same with a gun. Must have proof with you.

2- Must register the car. Many states dont require gun registry. But do for cars. Make all guns be registered with the state, just like a car. Must have proof with you.

3- Gun Insurance. Yep. You must have liability insurance on the gun. Just like a car. If you accidentally shoot someone, you pay up...er, well, the insurance company pays up. Get caught outside your home with a gun, and no insurance? Go to jail, just like a car.



You can buy a car without a license, park it in your driveway, not register it, and carry no insurance on it, and its legal. You just cant drive it off your property.

Treat guns the same. Buy your guns for your home.

But take them anywhere off your property, and you must have a license, registration and insurance, just like a car.

Afterall, a car, like a gun....is just a tool, not a killing machine, unless being operated by the wrong person.

Fair enough?

lets tax the shit out of computers and the Internet instead, after all it can used as a weapon and if the Guberment finds you abusing it they can throw your ass in jail

 

[eflatminor]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

Actually, we don't. The States (not the Feds) may require insurance to operate a vehicle ON A PUBLIC ROAD. You don't need a license or insurance to buy a vehicle or to operate one on your own property.

Therefore, by your own reasoning, the Federal government should have NO involvement in the individual right to bear arms (or require insurance) but states are free to require a conceal carry license for firearms in public places.

Works for me.

Hmm...nothing. Perhaps a dose of reality sent 'ol bucs back into it's hole???

 

[saveliberty]

Probably just saw his shadow eflat.

 

[Sallow]

How bout this? Treat guns exactly like cars; no worse, no better.

How about this:

FUCK OFF.

Guns are protected by the Bill of Rights. Cars aren't.

No they are not.

 

[DiamondDave]

Funny.. all that CAR stuff is regulated by the STATE (not the fed), and does not go against a constitutionally granted right

But thank you for playing, bucsderp... See Don Pardo for some lovely parting gifts

 

[DiamondDave]

How bout this? Treat guns exactly like cars; no worse, no better.

How about this:

FUCK OFF.

Guns are protected by the Bill of Rights. Cars aren't.

No they are not.

Yes.. the rights of the individual to own them IS... no matter ho much you continue to spew your lies otherwise

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

[healthmyths]

Yet another troll fail....

Listen gun grabbers - Gun control legislation will go nowhere. That's why Obama put the worlds stupidest man in charge of it.....

I really like your "Obama truly is Chance/Chauncey! Loved how the idiots i.e. shirley McClain in the movie (and in real life by the way!!) ate his television fed statements as awe inspiring and everytime I see Obama floating in air I remember...

Editor of NewsWeek Evan Thomas was quoted....
Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters.org

So what kind of job is the MSM doing today with regards to Obama???

But then when it comes to Obama what's the Chancy/Obama characterization???

I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Evan Thomas on Hardball, June 5, 2009.
Newsweek

These 30 second sound bite disciples of Obama/Chauncey are truly pitiful!

 

[KissMy]

General population is 8 times more likely to commit murders than legal gun owners. Therefore they should have to buy insurance, not legal gun owners.

According to FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2011, of the 12,664 murders committed by firearm, 75% were done by convicted felons and 20% from juveniles or less than 21 years old. That's 95% of murderers who can't have guns legally - they aren't lawful gun owners.

Even we assume the high number of the rest of 5% murders were indeed committed by lawful gun owners (bad assumption because many could be criminals but don't have prior conviction), that is still a tiny percentage compared to 100 million lawful gun owners (estimated 36% of American are lawful gun owners).

If I calculate, it would be 0.0006% (12,664x5%/100,000,000) or 0.6 murder in 100,000 lawful gun owners compared to 4.8 in the general population.

In another word, the general population is 8 (4.8/0.6) times more likely to commit murders than lawful gun owners.

 

[PredFan]

How bout this? Treat guns exactly like cars; no worse, no better.

To carry a gun anywhere outside your home, you must:

1- Have a license. If you drive a car without license, you go to jail. Lets make it the same with a gun. Must have proof with you.

2- Must register the car. Many states dont require gun registry. But do for cars. Make all guns be registered with the state, just like a car. Must have proof with you.

3- Gun Insurance. Yep. You must have liability insurance on the gun. Just like a car. If you accidentally shoot someone, you pay up...er, well, the insurance company pays up. Get caught outside your home with a gun, and no insurance? Go to jail, just like a car.



You can buy a car without a license, park it in your driveway, not register it, and carry no insurance on it, and its legal. You just cant drive it off your property.

Treat guns the same. Buy your guns for your home.

But take them anywhere off your property, and you must have a license, registration and insurance, just like a car.

Afterall, a car, like a gun....is just a tool, not a killing machine, unless being operated by the wrong person.

Fair enough?

We don't have a right to drive a car. We do have a right to own a gun. You are wrong yet again.

/THREAD