Keeping on course, all the cars I listed above are "limited" in some fashion due to their excessive capability. It's not exactly government policy....
Printable View
Please inform me of these limitations.....
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Jet_Truck.jpg
I never suggested any cars are not allowed to be manufactured imported or sold based on its ability to exceed the speed limit. I said and I quote "what are some ways these cars are limited due to their capabilities? I didn't say banned, I didn't say unable to be sold or manufactured. Just read what I posted. Don't read anything else.
I've had my fill of liberal rhetoric for the night. Blank getting beat like a pinata as usual. Until next time.......
You went back and edited.
There is no government limitation on private sales of car between US citizens. If I want to purchase a Lamborghini tonight from another private citizen (and I have enough) then I can purchase it without a background check, or waiting for a government approval. I do not even have to have a drivers license if I only use it on my own property, nor do I have to get a tag for it in every county (some counties have regulations concerning tags in their county, but there is no federal mandate). I simply purchase it, and I can do with it as I want, as long as I do not violate any standard laws - like killing someone.
Why shouldn't semi-automatic rifles be the same way? Why shouldn't a .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle and an AR-15 be treated identically? Either can be used in the same manner, and one cannot make a person "more dead" than the other.
You answered the question already. The question was what limits do we already have in place for these high powered cars to prevent speeding and accidents. Purchase price is the limitation. Insurance cost is the other, registration costs are another, limited production runs are another. These limitations, directly or indirectly keep people from breaking laws and injuring other people.
We aren't talking about how we use them on private property, cause if its paid for sitting in your garage, you're probably not speeding, and its also probably not necessary for you to use such a car for your survival.
And all guns should be treated the same way. It shouldn't be as easy as it is for a criminal to get one.
You are delusional again.
Purchase price is controlled by the law of supply and demand. The federal government does not say, "This car is too fast, we need to raise the price on it to slow people down." They don't regulate on perception that someone might drive beyond their capabilities either - if they did, all Honda Civics would be more expensive than Ferraris - all the kids try to drive them beyond their limits and crash.
ANY car that you buy from the dealership can break the speed limit - even a Jetta TDI. Almost every car that you can buy privately can break the speed limit as well, provided that they aren't half broken down. There are NO price controls on purchase price based upon the car's performance abilities alone - not one.
Registration costs are not involved with the federal government at all. They are local county costs, and have nothing to do with the performance capabilities of the car - simply based on the age and taxable value of the vehicle. They have no effect on controlling the driving habits of individuals, nor were they ever intended to.
Insurance costs are not related to regulation by the federal government based upon the capabilities of the car. The federal government does not even require you to have insurance on your car. Insurance is mandated in GA at a state level - and if you use your car on public roads. Track-only cars do not typically have insurance or registration at all, as it is not required. Insurance companies charge rates on what they perceive the risk is, not from any federal table of cost to performance capability.
Limited production runs? Really? Those are controlled by the manufacturer, and have nothing to do with any regulations. They are solely marketing methods to generate the most profit for the manufacturer. Did you even take Economics 101?
What you listed isn't even remotely related to government regulations and laws in keeping people from breaking laws. if you truly believe the drivel that you just typed, you probably should not have a driver's license.
Private property does not have to be inside your garage. It can be on any non-public road, field, farm, etc. Race cars, tractors, farm trucks, etc, are usually not registered or tagged, or driven on public roads - and you can speed as much as you like on private property.
As for firearms, have you tried to purchase an AR15? They already have a much higher cost than a .30-.30 or .308, just like a Ferrari is more expensive than a Honda.
I live in reality, a place that is very foreign to you.
What part of the government does not control the price of cars do you not understand? You stated some obvious false statements, and I called you out on them. You can't just admit you are flat-out wrong, instead you have to try to find some why to try to justify your fantasy.
I already understand the costs associated with cars - I've owned a lot of cars, and still have several. You appear to not have much knowledge though concerning what the costs actually are for, and who controls them.
You claim that you studied economics, but I have a hard time believing that, since you wouldn't have even made it through JA in HS with what you are spouting.
Ferrari sets the price of Ferraris - they aren't magically cheaper outside of the US. You didn't know that?
If you want to talk performance to cost - I can buy an old Mustang for $10K, and pay $50/month for insurance, and have more horsepower and torque than a new Ferrari. Where are the price controls on that?
I still waiting on you to answer "On what foundation do you determine if something should be changed?"
If you can't answer it, just say so. Here's a hint - you are talking about a legal change.
It's not a fantasy. I just gave you an analogy of how we control guns through policy. Simple as that. This is what happens. This is economics 101. You read too much into the analogy. If you put as much effort trying to understand gun control as you do trying to figure out ways to tell me I'm wrong (and fail at in the process), we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
This is how you control guns with contractionary policy, and contractionary policy happens all over the place. Im not arguing something thats debatable, and its not my opinion. That's what contractionary policy is, and either you disagree with its implementation or you agree with it. It's like you're trying to argue that subtraction isn't a thing.
Stop with the banning=confiscation thing. It's tired.
You are definitely in a fantasy world. Not one of the items that you stated are pricing control policies from the federal government. Not one. Show me these policies and their legal foundation for the regulation of these pieces of private property. Give the actual laws on them, not just your delusional opinion.
Where did I say anything about confiscation? Again, you fail miserably.