CDZ Comparing Guns and Motor Vehicles in the US

[320 Years of History]

Then why do all the anti gunner journalists and activists keep doing it....?

That is a question you will need to pose to one or more of the journalists who have made such a comparison.

The creator of this thread presented the idea and referenced no journalist's articles in the OP. I think you may want to ask him/her how s/he came up with the idea and whether it was inspired by something one of those journalists to whom you refer wrote, or whether it was originally crafted in the bowels of her/his mind. I have no idea where our fellow member got the idea to compare gun deaths/killings with vehicular deaths/killings.

 

[2aguy]

The automobile is designed for safe, efficient transportation. What is the gun designed to do?

It is designed to keep the owner alive.

As are modern automobiles. Yours is no distinction.

Has it occurred that ABS braking systems, air bags, seat belat and collision reinforcement zones are designed to keep the owner alive?

What are the safety qualities of devices designed to propel lead slugs at high velocity?

there are drop safety features to prevent the weapon from firing when dropped. The Safety features have made guns as safe for the user as you can make them and still operate as it was intended.

And the gun serves it's purpose....it keeps the owner alive either by providing food, or by providing protection from violent attack. And then it also serves for sport and other enjoyment....

 

[Jeddahite]

Are you still comparing guns to cars or buckets? Why? Cars ARE regulated, both the car and the driver. More and more safety features are being developed to prevent car accidents. Not so for guns, thanks to the NRA.

 

[2aguy]

Are you still comparing guns to cars or buckets? Why? Cars ARE regulated, both the car and the driver. More and more safety features are being developed to prevent car accidents. Not so for guns, thanks to the NRA.

You should try to do some research...if you did you would know why your above post is incorrect....but thanks for playing.

 

[Jeddahite]

It's almost 2016. Dig up a new argument.

 

[2aguy]

It's almost 2016. Dig up a new argument.

You guys have been using the same silly arguments since the Germans used them.......try something new how about?

 

[Jeddahite]

Pffft.

 

[2aguy]

Pffft.

Do you really think you are the first one to say the things you say about guns....? Everything you have said has been used by people who want to disarm the general public throughout history.....over and over again.....So we know where your ideas go...and we want no part of them.

 

[320 Years of History]

The automobile is designed for safe, efficient transportation. What is the gun designed to do?

It is designed to keep the owner alive.

That is not the design objective associated with guns. Guns were and are designed to fire projectiles. Guns are not the only devices designed to fire projectiles, just as cars are not the only machines designed to transport people from point A to point B.

The defensive use you identify is just that, the manner in which a user opts to use the gun. It may even be reason the user/owner buys a gun. That does not mean that the gun they bought was designed for defensive purposes. The same is so with regard to offensive use.

If you cannot see and apply the distinction between an object's design and the ways in which that design, the object, may be used, I believe you should neither participate in this discussion -- other than to ask sincere questions so that your knowledge and understanding of the specific subject matter and in general may be further developed -- nor, if given the opportunity to do so, should you render a vote pertaining to the matter of gun control/rights.

Refraining from the former is far less critical than is refraining from the latter. Whereas participating in the discussion while ignorant of and not understanding the design objective of a gun makes you little but a blowhard, actually voting on a gun-related matter while in such a state of ignorance is disingenuous, callous and irresponsible. Just what allows you (or anyone similarly ignorant about what a gun is designed to do) to feel that you should have a meaningful say (a vote) on a matter pertaining to guns? All o' y'all need to return to the kids' table and eat your vegetables; this is one of those occasions where, by dint of your ignorance, you need to be seen and not heard.

 

[jillian]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

you have to take tests, get licensed and be insured to have a car.

you want that with guns?

 

[jillian]

Pffft.

Do you really think you are the first one to say the things you say about guns....? Everything you have said has been used by people who want to disarm the general public throughout history.....over and over again.....So we know where your ideas go...and we want no part of them.

you have no ideas.... mass shooting after mass shooting... no prob. a couple of people die because of a muslim terrorist and you have mental breakdowns.

 

[jillian]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

Motor vehicles need to be registered, and their drivers need to be licensed and insured. Are you recommending all of those for guns and gun owners?

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

 

[B. Kidd]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

Motor vehicles need to be registered, and their drivers need to be licensed and insured. Are you recommending all of those for guns and gun owners?

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

 

[jillian]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

Motor vehicles need to be registered, and their drivers need to be licensed and insured. Are you recommending all of those for guns and gun owners?

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

 

[320 Years of History]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

I cannot help but believe that the OP of this thread created it with the intent of laying back and observing just who is fool enough to latch onto and attempt to support the specious correspondence, or refute it as though it's actually a meritorious analogy, made in the opening post. The whole idea "from the get go" was just too outlandish to be anything but a clandestine effort to find out who the real idiots and ideological zealots are, for few others would take up, or get their dander up, over whatever similarities and differences exist between guns and cars.

 

[B. Kidd]

There are roughly the same number of guns and motor vehicles in the US, and they are associated with the same number of deaths. However, about 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, so the likelihood of accidental death involving a car is about three times the likelihood of being killed by a gun (even greater if you factor out criminal/law enforcement deaths).

It just occurred to me that, given the huge number of guns in our country, remarkably few deaths can be attributed to gun ownership per se. Statistically, you are much safer owning a gun than driving in a car. Shouldn't we be more concerned about the illegal use of firearms instead of their ownership?

Motor vehicles need to be registered, and their drivers need to be licensed and insured. Are you recommending all of those for guns and gun owners?

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

I'm not an attorney..........are you gonna pay me by the minute for googling it?

 

[jillian]

Motor vehicles need to be registered, and their drivers need to be licensed and insured. Are you recommending all of those for guns and gun owners?

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

I'm not an attorney..........are you gonna pay me by the minute for googling it?

no. but i am. are you going to pay *me* by the minute for googling it, idiota?

i told you what to look for. you can learn something or not.

 

[B. Kidd]

Drivin' is a privilege..........gun ownership a right.........please look up the fine details between the two before commenting any furthur. Thanx!

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

I'm not an attorney..........are you gonna pay me by the minute for googling it?

no. but i am. are you going to pay *me* by the minute for googling it, idiota?

i told you what to look for. you can learn something or not.

Is this what is called a teaching moment?

 

[jillian]

there is no "right" to UNREGULATED gun ownership. you might want to go back and re-read Heller.

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

I'm not an attorney..........are you gonna pay me by the minute for googling it?

no. but i am. are you going to pay *me* by the minute for googling it, idiota?

i told you what to look for. you can learn something or not.

Is this what is called a teaching moment?

only if you choose to learn. if not, then it's just another moment.

but if you're going to insist on what your "rights" are, you should know what they actually are. now be a good boy and read Heller. because even scalia, the windiest of the wingers doesn't think you're entitled to unregulated guns. he only said a total ban is unconstitutional.

 

[B. Kidd]

Link to Heller, please.
I don't research other peoples' name-drops.

you can google Heller as well as I can. It's public record.

I'm not an attorney..........are you gonna pay me by the minute for googling it?

no. but i am. are you going to pay *me* by the minute for googling it, idiota?

i told you what to look for. you can learn something or not.

Is this what is called a teaching moment?

only if you choose to learn. if not, then it's just another moment.

but if you're going to insist on what your "rights" are, you should know what they actually are. now be a good boy and read Heller. because even scalia, the windiest of the wingers doesn't think you're entitled to unregulated guns. he only said a total ban is unconstitutional.

Rights, like privileges, are not unconditional (for example, ex-felons can't legally own firearms). Common sense just dictates that.
Privileges just come with alot, a helluva lot more legal strings attached than rights do. And for that reason, looney-left liberals would just love to make gun-ownership a privilege instead of a right!

See, I just figured that out on my own without reading Heller............just common sense!