Why do democrats support assault VEHICLES??

[Noomi]

STFU.

Seriously. You piss me off, and you piss everyone else off. Its no wonder no one likes you.

HAHAHA. I love watching liberals explode when i point out their hypocrisy.

Where was the hypocrisy in that post?

 

[Skull Pilot]

If the dims had their way we'd all be driving tin cans

After all why does anyone "need" a big car

 

[theDoctorisIn]

When did speed limits become a partisan issue?

 

[BallsBrunswick]

Holy fuck, how many of these retarded car/gun comparison threads are you going to start?

 

[Old Rocks]

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015 - Bloomberg

Guns and cars have long been among the leading causes of non-medical deaths in the U.S. By 2015, firearm fatalities will probably exceed traffic fatalities for the first time, based on data compiled by Bloomberg.

While motor-vehicle deaths dropped 22 percent from 2005 to 2010, gun fatalities are rising again after a low point in 2000, according to the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Shooting deaths in 2015 will probably rise to almost 33,000, and those related to autos will decline to about 32,000, based on the 10-year average trend.

 

[squinch]

If the dims had their way we'd all be driving tin cans

After all why does anyone "need" a big car

Tell it to the dipshit who started this thread.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They love to ask what legitimate purpose is served by assault rifles but same can be asked of cars that do 200 mph or 150 or 100. Why do we let people have cars DESIGNED to go way over the legal speed limit?

So a car doesn't have to run at full throttle maximum rpm's to reach the speed limit you moron.

 

[zeke]

They love to ask what legitimate purpose is served by assault rifles but same can be asked of cars that do 200 mph or 150 or 100. Why do we let people have cars DESIGNED to go way over the legal speed limit?

Oh fuk. Another ignorant gun owner that can't tell the difference between a car and a gun.

Do you really own weapons? Are they under lock? YOU know,not like the supposed responsible gun owner in Conn.

Are you one of those gun owners that can't tell what an assault rifle looks is. And isn't.
And you own guns. Fuk. Scary isn't it.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Oh fuk. Another ignorant gun owner that can't tell the difference between a car and a gun.

.

Sigh -- Another ignorant democrat who thinks killing by gun is terrible but killing by car is ok. Get help please.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Guns and cars have long been among the leading causes of non-medical deaths in the U.S. By 2015, firearm fatalities will probably exceed traffic fatalities for the first time, based on data compiled by Bloomberg.

While motor-vehicle deaths dropped 22 percent from 2005 to 2010, gun fatalities are rising again after a low point in 2000, according to the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Shooting deaths in 2015 will probably rise to almost 33,000, and those related to autos will decline to about 32,000, based on the 10-year average trend.

And half of those gun deaths are suicides. Why do these lying democrats count those as homicides??

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Where was the hypocrisy in that post?

The hypocrisy is the claim by democrats that gun killing is bad but car killing is cool.

 

[there4eyeM]

While we could justifiably ask why cars capable of so enormously more than necessary should be permitted, it has little to do with firearms.

 

[Skull Pilot]

While we could justifiably ask why cars capable of so enormously more than necessary should be permitted, it has little to do with firearms.

It has to do with the "you don't need that" argument that the gun ban crowd is using.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

While we could justifiably ask why cars capable of so enormously more than necessary should be permitted, it has little to do with firearms.

HAHAHA. More illogic from the libs. The two issues are in fact inseparable. Anyone who thinks that 35,000 highway deaths each year is acceptable has no business complaining about 32,000 gun deaths ( half of which are suicides!)

 

[there4eyeM]

More illogic from those incapable of seeing more than two categories, 'lib' and 'con'. It is impossible to have a discussion with someone who automatically judges any idea other than her/his own to be wrong and enemy.

Cars and guns? Get real!

 

[MikeK]

I'm not one that believes that all guns should be banned but I must say, enough of these idiotic comparisons between guns and cars/fertilizer/knives. Cars are used as a mode of transportation. Fertilizer is used to aid the growth of plants. Knives are used to cut food and other objects. What other use do guns have besides killing/maiming?

While the primary purpose of motor vehicles is transportation a significant percentage of their use is either recreational or is wholly unnecessary. If the recreational and unnecessary use of motor vehicles were restricted the percentage of highway fatalities and injuries would be proportionally reduced.

As unwelcome as that proposal might seem, if twenty children were killed in a school bus collision which was caused by a teen-age driver in a speeding sports car rest assured the proposal would be taken seriously and there would be calls for installing speed governors on most cars, as well as other restrictive proposals.

 

[Political Junky]

Even cars driven at legal speeds of 55mph will kill. But the car's main purpose is a mode of transportation.

Of course cars can kill at 55mph. Driving a car will always be risky but we can greatly reduce the risk by measures like lowering speed limits. But liberals say hell with it.

Try getting your rich con friends to pass a law saying their Mercedes can only go 55mph.

 

[MikeK]

I'm not one that believes that all guns should be banned but I must say, enough of these idiotic comparisons between guns and cars/fertilizer/knives. Cars are used as a mode of transportation. Fertilizer is used to aid the growth of plants. Knives are used to cut food and other objects. What other use do guns have besides killing/maiming?

Back in the 1950s "switchblade" knives (stilletos) were commonly sold in hardware and sporting goods stores. I can recall them being displayed on counter-cards in the 50s version of convenience stores. They cost a dollar and they came in a wide choice of colors.

The switchblade knife became a favorite prop of the 50s gang-bangers, one of whom was stabbed to death with a switchblade during a "rumble" in Brooklyn's Prospect Park. Shortly thereafter a 50s version of hysteria led to the ban on any knife which opened with assistance of a push-button and a spring. And while I'm not sure the ban was universal across the U.S. I do know "switchblade" knives are still illegal in New York and New Jersey.

A "switchblade" knife is no more capable of killing someone than is an ordinary folding (pocket) knife, table knife, utility knife, etc. But public hysteria led to them being banned, just as public hysteria will lead to high-capacity gun magazines being banned, along with renewal of the so-called "assault" rifle ban.

And you may rest assured that one more bomb like the one Timothy McVeigh built will generate sufficient public hysteria and political opportunism to bring about a ban on ammonium nitrate fertilizer.

 

[Koios]

They love to ask what legitimate purpose is served by assault rifles but same can be asked of cars that do 200 mph or 150 or 100. Why do we let people have cars DESIGNED to go way over the legal speed limit?

Because we love the blood!!! If it bleeds it leads. Face it. We're all drawn to carnage and as a spectator, it's entertaining as all get out. Why else slow down to gawk at it?

And why do you think it's Democrats that are always coming to the rescue of auto-maker lobbists and opposing higher vehicle safety standards???? (Oops; it's the Republicans who did.)

 

[MikeK]

I'm not one that believes that all guns should be banned but I must say, enough of these idiotic comparisons between guns and cars/fertilizer/knives. Cars are used as a mode of transportation. Fertilizer is used to aid the growth of plants. Knives are used to cut food and other objects. What other use do guns have besides killing/maiming?

The final point of your message is well taken. Guns have no purpose other than killing and maiming -- and wouldn't it be wonderful if they could be effectively banned. But they can't and any attempt to ban them would disarm the law-abiding, leaving the lawless armed and in absolute power. And therein lies the tale.

The leading question of the day is, why does any civilian need to own an "assault weapon?" The obvious but unspoken answer is there is no perceptible need -- as of today. But who can speak for tomorrow -- especially the way American society is shaping up?

I firmly believe where firearms are concerned it is better to have one and not need it than to need one and not have it. And because one cannot be sure of the level of threat one might face why assume that an ordinary revolver or sporting-grade long gun will be sufficient to deal with it?

I think of an "assault weapon" in a closet to be analogous to a flood insurance policy. I certainly am not expecting a flood but, just in case, I have a policy which I sincerely hope I'll never need to invoke.