Page 1 of 55 123451151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 2190

Thread: Defend your right to own a car.

  1. #1
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default Defend your right to own a car.

    Public transportation is available in many places and could be made available in all place. Do we need cars? over 100 people die in car accidents a DAY in the united states.... in a single day... everyday. There's no mental health screening to purchase car so there's no telling what type of deranged individual is operating a vehicle on your public streets. Cars have historically been assistants to crime related activities. People use cars as get away cars, to transport people illegally, to transport drugs and a variety of other criminal activities. If everyone used public transportation this would be completely eliminated.

    The banning of personal transportation would delete many common problems in the united states. A few examples...

    It would be more difficult to conceal kidnapping. A child would be seen in the open in distress and obviously would alert public transport if forced to board.

    Drug transport would be crippled. A shipment of drugs would not be able to transport from one end of the country to the other.

    Drunk driving would be a thing of the past. Public transport drivers would be trained and tested.

    Fatality from driver error would cease to exist.

    Law enforcement would have a mobilization advantage over any criminal activity.

    You could go on and on and on.......

    So, defend your right to own a car? i say "right"..... but truthfully... you do not have the right. The constitution said nothing about cars..... our forefathers didnt intend for you to own a corvette that did 0-60 in 3 seconds or a motorcycle that does 190 mph. You are allowed this privilege by your government and we clearly abuse it since 100s of people die a day as a result of cars.

    As a nation, we cant sit back and watch our kids continue to die. If we can save just 1 life..... just 1 child.... then we have to try.


  2. #2
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    We should have FAR better licensing requirements and health screens IMO. At least the equivalent of getting a competition license.

    Your relation to gun violence is comical though, how many of these 100 people a day dead are from a legitimate attack using a vehicle? I like guns and support owning guns, but some of you need to use common sense and understand other views to make a valid argument.

  3. #3
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    We should have FAR better licensing requirements and health screens IMO. At least the equivalent of getting a competition license.
    Almost every car crash fatality happens with a licensed driver. We dont need cars capable of inflicting the carnage that they do. We dont need cars that go the speeds that they go. I understand that racing is part of our history and something that you enjoy..... but race cars are dangerous. With these cars being made available to the public there's no way of keeping them away from people who intend to abuse them. If 1 life can be saved, then it needs to be done.

  4. #4
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    I can't even think of a reply on this level.

    Like I said, think of a real debate. You make everyone else that supports guns sound like you and that's a bad thing. You're comparing automobile ACCIDENTS to firearm CRIME.

    Yes, more people die in cars, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see WHY and to see they aren't CAUSED BY AN ATTACK.

  5. #5
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    I can't even think of a reply on this level.

    Like I said, think of a real debate. You make everyone else that supports guns sound like you and that's a bad thing. You're comparing automobile ACCIDENTS to firearm CRIME.

    Yes, more people die in cars, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see WHY and to see they aren't CAUSED BY AN ATTACK.
    Not every car death is an accident or crash. Cars are used for CRIME. People intentionally and voluntarily use vehicles to commit illegal activity. Alcoholism is a mental health disorder that we're not adequately identifying. Every year innocent children are killed by drunk drivers. Innocent young females are trafficked for prostitution. Drugs are transported. People die as a result of voluntary exhibitions of speed. If we can stop 1 shipment of drugs...... one young girl from being trafficked.... one child from dying to a drunk driver... then we have to try.






    It's funny how i use the SAME argument..... but when it's something i care about, im a lunatic..... but when it's something you care about.... oh the story changes then.... argument is ridiculous. You're definitely a liberal. You cant engage in a debate simply because you're not equip to do so.
    Last edited by Sinfix_15; 01-18-2013 at 11:05 AM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    The roots of car modification all trace back to criminal activity. Nascar even proclaims that it was born from moonshiners. Moonshiners modified their cars to outrun the police. The mob modified their cars to outrun the police. It's clear that only the police should have cars.......

    America has a car culture problem, we glorify this activity in movies and tvshows with car chases and races. Public street racing is glorified in the fast and furious, dukes or hazard... america has an obsession with car chases and it's sickening. We need to quit putting our children at the risk of excessive automobiles. If we can save 1 life we need to try.

  7. #7
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    The roots of car modification all trace back to criminal activity. Nascar even proclaims that it was born from moonshiners. Moonshiners modified their cars to outrun the police. The mob modified their cars to outrun the police. It's clear that only the police should have cars.......

    America has a car culture problem, we glorify this activity in movies and tvshows with car chases and races. Public street racing is glorified in the fast and furious, dukes or hazard... america has an obsession with car chases and it's sickening. We need to quit putting our children at the risk of excessive automobiles. If we can save 1 life we need to try.
    You're forgetting I'm not against guns though. Once again you can't read.

    If you really can't see why comparing guns and cars doesn't work then we are done.

  8. #8
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    You're forgetting I'm not against guns though. Once again you can't read.

    If you really can't see why comparing guns and cars doesn't work then we are done.
    You seem to make the mistake of thinking that your mind set is one shared by everyone and begin attacking me as you often do with other members. You also cant seem to read as you're in a car thread talking about guns. I'm honestly unsure how to have a civil debate if you're incapable of sticking to topic and debating your point of view without simply trying to attack me.

  9. #9
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    simon, just tell me why you need a car capable of going over 100mph? why do we need motorcycles that go 180mph....? can you give me a reason?

  10. #10
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    You seem to make the mistake of thinking that your mind set is one shared by everyone and begin attacking me as you often do with other members. You also cant seem to read as you're in a car thread talking about guns. I'm honestly unsure how to have a civil debate if you're incapable of sticking to topic and debating your point of view without simply trying to attack me.
    Right. You attacked me first in my other thread. lol

    All I'm saying is a car to gun debate doesn't work the same, some points are true such as DUIs, but others not so much. Stop acting like I'm the bad guy, I support guns, I support owning guns. I'm just saying gun supporters need real arguments and I personally don't find this one. I'm not attacking you over it.

    Funny that you negative repped me for it though. lolol

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    simon, just tell me why you need a car capable of going over 100mph? why do we need motorcycles that go 180mph....? can you give me a reason?
    No, I also drive a stock truck that I wouldn't take over 100mph. So find someone with a fast car to answer that one. lol

  11. #11
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    Right. You attacked me first in my other thread. lol

    All I'm saying is a car to gun debate doesn't work the same, some points are true such as DUIs, but others not so much. Stop acting like I'm the bad guy, I support guns, I support owning guns. I'm just saying gun supporters need real arguments and I personally don't find this one. I'm not attacking you over it.

    Funny that you negative repped me for it though. lolol



    No, I also drive a stock truck that I wouldn't take over 100mph. So find someone with a fast car to answer that one. lol
    It doesnt matter if you would or wouldnt take it over 100mph... it is CAPABLE..... your truck is capable of crushing an entire family and killing them if you misused it or operated it while intoxicated.

    Why do you need a truck capable of doing 100mph... and why do you need a truck to begin with? We need either a vehicle ban completely..... or weight and speed restrictions. Would you be ok with a 1000 pound limit on all cars and a universal maximum speed of 40mph?

  12. #12
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    It doesnt matter if you would or wouldnt take it over 100mph... it is CAPABLE..... your truck is capable of crushing an entire family and killing them if you misused it or operated it while intoxicated.

    Why do you need a truck capable of doing 100mph... and why do you need a truck to begin with? We need either a vehicle ban completely..... or weight and speed restrictions. Would you be ok with a 1000 pound limit on all cars and a universal maximum speed of 40mph?
    On the street? I wouldn't care.

    I still don't get why you're asking me these questions though, ask someone that is anti-gun.

  13. #13
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    On the street? I wouldn't care.

    I still don't get why you're asking me these questions though, ask someone that is anti-gun.
    Nobody is talking about guns.

    On the street? what prevents someone from misusing their off road vehicle on the street? universal restriction on ALL vehicles produced and on all vehicle modification. Think of the lives that would be saved. Someone could have not lost their son or daughter had we as americans acted on this sooner.

  14. #14
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Got to run...... hope someone provides a better counter argument since Simon is dead in the water.

  15. #15
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    I don't have a counter-argument because you're trying to get someone that's anti-guns to say this is stupid and then turn it around on them. Since we share the same gun beliefs, that can't happen with me.

  16. #16
    Slowest Car on IA David88vert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Age
    51
    Posts
    8,378
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simontibbett View Post
    I can't even think of a reply on this level.

    Like I said, think of a real debate. You make everyone else that supports guns sound like you and that's a bad thing. You're comparing automobile ACCIDENTS to firearm CRIME.

    Yes, more people die in cars, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see WHY and to see they aren't CAUSED BY AN ATTACK.
    Intentionally used as a weapon - and within the last 24 hours:
    Tamara Hatchett, 28, is accused of trying to run down her ex-boyfriend before crashing into his car in front of the Heart of the City Club on State Street in Bunnell and leaving the scene. | News-JournalOnline.com

    Police: Kathleen Trombley killed in crash after trying to run down two men on sidewalk after bar fight | wtsp.com

    Henry Daily Herald | DUI driver tried to run down cops, say police

    And kids being killed by a driver intentionally - remember Susan Smith?
    Susan Smith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Why can't you just ride the bus and save a life? None of the incidents above were even close to 100mph.
    "Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen

  17. #17
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    I don't see what your point is.

    I was wrong, I guess there are quite a few cases of cars being used as weapons.

    I don't want cars OR guns banned though. So what exactly do you all want me to argue? lol Just choose a side and argue just to argue?

  18. #18
    Slowest Car on IA David88vert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Age
    51
    Posts
    8,378
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    We should just take the whole deal of state control over their own juristiction away and let the President resolve everything with an executive order. No need for the state legislatures or courts to deal with these decisions anymore. No need to have Congress or the federal courts to have any say in it either, just go directly to the King (President), and let him issue a decree (executive order).
    I think it worked really well in the Middle Ages, so it should work well now, right?
    "Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen

  19. #19
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David88vert View Post
    We should just take the whole deal of state control over their own juristiction away and let the President resolve everything with an executive order. No need for the state legislatures or courts to deal with these decisions anymore. No need to have Congress or the federal courts to have any say in it either, just go directly to the King (President), and let him issue a decree (executive order).
    I think it worked really well in the Middle Ages, so it should work well now, right?
    I feel like you're speaking to me as if I disagree with this conversation. lol

  20. #20
    Slowest Car on IA David88vert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Age
    51
    Posts
    8,378
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    Actually, that one wasn't directed at you.

  21. #21
    Senior Member | IA Veteran Elbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    29,397
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David88vert View Post
    Actually, that one wasn't directed at you.
    Oh, sorry.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,627
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Sinflix, here is my reply although I'm not one of the ones that thinks we should ban all guns either. There are pros and cons to all technology and tools. The restrictions we place on them are based upon the balance of those benefits and dangers. Cars and the easy availability of them play a very beneficial role in our country but they are also very dangerous so we do put certain restrictions on them (age, licensing, insurance, etc). Guns also are very dangerous like cars so most everyone agrees we should have some restrictions on those as well. People who argue for restrictions on guns believe the restrictions help to mitigate the large danger they pose in order to balance them against their small benefit. Everyone will weigh the pros/cons of gun availability differently because we all have different values and there is plenty of logic/evidence for both sides.

  23. #23
    magical negro/photog .blank cd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    12,103
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Stupid thread is stupid

    NIKON Squad member 01

    I HAVE SUBS AND CAMERAS AND LENSES FO SALE
    OF*C
    OEMFitment Crew Memeber 01

  24. #24
    IA's Resident Medic Bacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    McDonough
    Age
    37
    Posts
    10,591
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Fatality from driver error would cease to exist?

    That wouldnt be true.

    Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk.
    Quote Originally Posted by Echonova View Post
    Bitches love bacon.

  25. #25
    Senior Member | IA Veteran quickdodgeŽ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    In your soul
    Age
    53
    Posts
    71,805
    Rep Power
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    Defend your right to own a car
    Do people actually think owning a car is a "right?"
    FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!


  26. #26
    Senior Member E36slide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Athens
    Posts
    2,579
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    You pay insurance and taxes on your car after its paid for....owning a car is a privilege not a right.


    Sent from my mind
    <3 Catnipples

  27. #27
    magical negro/photog .blank cd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    12,103
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by quickdodgeŽ View Post
    Do people actually think owning a car is a "right?"
    According to the Supreme Court, technically it is.

    NIKON Squad member 01

    I HAVE SUBS AND CAMERAS AND LENSES FO SALE
    OF*C
    OEMFitment Crew Memeber 01

  28. #28
    Senior Member | IA Veteran quickdodgeŽ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    In your soul
    Age
    53
    Posts
    71,805
    Rep Power
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
    According to the Supreme Court, technically it is.
    I'd like to the see the "technicality" part of it.
    FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!


  29. #29
    I'm not OK. Doppelgänger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    wherever
    Age
    41
    Posts
    7,366
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    As much as I've agreed with Sin on some things, and as much as I used to really NOT get along with Simon, I really have to take Simon's side on this. The comparison is a joke at best and one cannot be compared to the other. You are taking an object whose one and only sole purpose is to KILL. Not designed for anything else...just to KILL. On the other hand, you are takign an object that was designed to move people and goods across a distance in less time than previous methods. People dying from automobiles is a side effect of their creation. People dying from guns is NOT a side effect to their creation. When someone gets into a car and drives down a road, their intention is to get from point A to point B. When someone pulls a gun out and pulls the trigger, their intent is to make that person cease to exist. No one pulls a trigger and then goes "oh, I only meant to lightly hurt you with an object that was designed to kill". Same goes with the knife thing, the rock thing, the metal pole thing the baseball bat thing. NONE of those items intended purpose was to KILL like a gun's purpose is. That is the difference.

    You know what else you are sorely missing from this "debate" (lol)?? Something that is the whole point of all of this battle-of-the-paranoid gun stuff? Are you really wondering by now what the fuck I am getting at? There is a BIG thing here that people seem to forget with this "comparison" and is the whole point of all of this discussion. Have you figure it out yet? Probably not.














    Are you scrolling down looking for the answer?













    Take a moment to think about it.












    GOVERNMENT REGULATION!!!!!!
    It seems NO ONE gets all up in a fucking fit when the government decides what is good for YOU when YOU are deciding what car YOU want to buy. Yes R E G U L A T I O N. That is the real core of the gun topic- regulations...not removal. If you belive for one tenth of a second that the "government is going to take your guns away", you are too dumb to even have a half logical discussion with. If you compare Obama to Hitler, Stalin, Mau or any other dictator who "took the guns away", you really have an issue with history and reasoning....and probably should just glue your mouth shut and glue your hands into fists. So you think that ANYONE with the opinion that the firearms industry could benefit from more regulation is a dictator who wants to kill everyone as they please. Funny that at no time has the President ever said anything about taking the guns away at all. But good job with the ASSumption. "Oh but regulation leads to government tracking and then when they know where the guns are they will ban them and come take them from us!".....yeah, right. Your car is registered to you already...as well as many other things. But back to my original point. The government has been regulating automobiles far more than guns and for a lot longer. So why are none of you extreme pro-gun people crying your eyes out that the government has regulated the airbags in your POS SUV or that automobile manufacturers have set fuel MPG standards and emissions standards that have robbed your car of valuable horsepower? Why are you not complaining about all the safety equipment? What about all that "regulation"? Would you agree that by making the car safer that serious injury/percentage of fatal accidents has decreased? Yes, I am NOT saying overall numbers because the number of cars on the road has increased between, let's say, the 1950's and now. So don't think for one second that you can say "well xxxx people died in 1962 and xxxxxxxxxxxx people died in 2011 from car accidents. The government has even gone as far as telling you what you can and cannot have on the road. What about that? Yeah, it sucks, I'd love to own some cars that aren't available here. I understand the "risk" that a car from overseas might not meet "US-spec" safety standards.....but plenty of other countries have safety standards that are just as good as ours and emissions requirements like ours. They've determined that some stuff just doesn't belong here. But I'm not going to waste all my time bitching and complaining, and getting all pissy about it.....I just bought something that I like and is allowed on the road by DOT standards. Also, the government has regulated how big of a car you can drive on the road and requires special licensing for different classes and an eventual limit on how big things on the road can be. Imagine that.

    So if you want to compare XYZ to guns, do it from the right point of view using what is relavent...the fact that a object has existed in society, the object's reasong for existance and what has been done about the object.

    With that said, I agree 100% that licensing tests need to be greatly revised and much harder to pass and the age should be raised and more license classes...as in you have you have a license proving you have demonstrated the ability to navigate a Hummer H2 or a Nissan Armada properly. Pass regulation that seniors need to take exams/driving tests more often as they get older. Penalties for driving without a license should also be more harsh (not a suspended license...but having never had taken the exam at all).


    As far as guns go, I'm not anti-gun by any means. But at what point do you need some of these weapons that are currently available? Are you such a poor shot or unsure of your ability to use a gun that you need some crazy rifle? Are you going to go hunting with a Bushmaster M4? No. Are you carring a AR-15 down the street "just in case" someone tried to rob you? No. I'm sure anone with a head on their shoulders would say that a handgun is the proper tool in pretty much any case of defense. So what is the need that you can justify for one type of weapon that some people don't think have any use? Don't even get me started on all the bills that have been passed in years past that have actually made it hard to pass new regulation to have sensable and logical regulations to help reduce how guns end up in the hands of criminals...
    02' Miata




  30. #30
    magical negro/photog .blank cd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    12,103
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by quickdodgeŽ View Post
    I'd like to the see the "technicality" part of it.
    I'll pull up the case law when I get home.

    NIKON Squad member 01

    I HAVE SUBS AND CAMERAS AND LENSES FO SALE
    OF*C
    OEMFitment Crew Memeber 01

  31. #31
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bu villain View Post
    Sinflix, here is my reply although I'm not one of the ones that thinks we should ban all guns either. There are pros and cons to all technology and tools. The restrictions we place on them are based upon the balance of those benefits and dangers. Cars and the easy availability of them play a very beneficial role in our country but they are also very dangerous so we do put certain restrictions on them (age, licensing, insurance, etc). Guns also are very dangerous like cars so most everyone agrees we should have some restrictions on those as well. People who argue for restrictions on guns believe the restrictions help to mitigate the large danger they pose in order to balance them against their small benefit. Everyone will weigh the pros/cons of gun availability differently because we all have different values and there is plenty of logic/evidence for both sides.
    Nice healthy argument you present here. I agree with most of it. Benefit vs dangers, are we judging this based on perception or stats? Statistically, only 300 people died from rifles last year, that's a pretty small margin of danger. Also, dont undervalue the benefit. A gun could save your life. Nothing is more valuable than that. Also, i stated that the government could provide us with transportation as they do in many places. The government's ability to meet our travel demands wouldnt be that much of a difference between their ability to protect us would it? Also, Obama's verbiage was " If we can save 1 life then we have to try " , i didnt say that... he did. If it's about lives.... and measured down to the importance of a single life.... then cars kill more people than guns. A life is a life no matter how it's taken. Are we saying that getting to bestbuy 15 minutes faster is more important than human life? Buses can provide transportation... sure, it would be a huge pain in the ass.... much like gun control.


    Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
    Stupid thread is stupid
    Any attempt to poke holes in the cloud that liberals live on is met with "that's stupid" or "youre a racist". Your party is so arrogant that theyre insulted that anyone questions them at all, doesnt matter how much merit the questioning may have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doppelgänger View Post
    As much as I've agreed with Sin on some things, and as much as I used to really NOT get along with Simon, I really have to take Simon's side on this. The comparison is a joke at best and one cannot be compared to the other. You are taking an object whose one and only sole purpose is to KILL. Not designed for anything else...just to KILL. On the other hand, you are takign an object that was designed to move people and goods across a distance in less time than previous methods. People dying from automobiles is a side effect of their creation. People dying from guns is NOT a side effect to their creation. When someone gets into a car and drives down a road, their intention is to get from point A to point B. When someone pulls a gun out and pulls the trigger, their intent is to make that person cease to exist. No one pulls a trigger and then goes "oh, I only meant to lightly hurt you with an object that was designed to kill". Same goes with the knife thing, the rock thing, the metal pole thing the baseball bat thing. NONE of those items intended purpose was to KILL like a gun's purpose is. That is the difference.

    You know what else you are sorely missing from this "debate" (lol)?? Something that is the whole point of all of this battle-of-the-paranoid gun stuff? Are you really wondering by now what the fuck I am getting at? There is a BIG thing here that people seem to forget with this "comparison" and is the whole point of all of this discussion. Have you figure it out yet? Probably not.














    Are you scrolling down looking for the answer?













    Take a moment to think about it.












    GOVERNMENT REGULATION!!!!!!
    It seems NO ONE gets all up in a fucking fit when the government decides what is good for YOU when YOU are deciding what car YOU want to buy. Yes R E G U L A T I O N. That is the real core of the gun topic- regulations...not removal. If you belive for one tenth of a second that the "government is going to take your guns away", you are too dumb to even have a half logical discussion with. If you compare Obama to Hitler, Stalin, Mau or any other dictator who "took the guns away", you really have an issue with history and reasoning....and probably should just glue your mouth shut and glue your hands into fists. So you think that ANYONE with the opinion that the firearms industry could benefit from more regulation is a dictator who wants to kill everyone as they please. Funny that at no time has the President ever said anything about taking the guns away at all. But good job with the ASSumption. "Oh but regulation leads to government tracking and then when they know where the guns are they will ban them and come take them from us!".....yeah, right. Your car is registered to you already...as well as many other things. But back to my original point. The government has been regulating automobiles far more than guns and for a lot longer. So why are none of you extreme pro-gun people crying your eyes out that the government has regulated the airbags in your POS SUV or that automobile manufacturers have set fuel MPG standards and emissions standards that have robbed your car of valuable horsepower? Why are you not complaining about all the safety equipment? What about all that "regulation"? Would you agree that by making the car safer that serious injury/percentage of fatal accidents has decreased? Yes, I am NOT saying overall numbers because the number of cars on the road has increased between, let's say, the 1950's and now. So don't think for one second that you can say "well xxxx people died in 1962 and xxxxxxxxxxxx people died in 2011 from car accidents. The government has even gone as far as telling you what you can and cannot have on the road. What about that? Yeah, it sucks, I'd love to own some cars that aren't available here. I understand the "risk" that a car from overseas might not meet "US-spec" safety standards.....but plenty of other countries have safety standards that are just as good as ours and emissions requirements like ours. They've determined that some stuff just doesn't belong here. But I'm not going to waste all my time bitching and complaining, and getting all pissy about it.....I just bought something that I like and is allowed on the road by DOT standards. Also, the government has regulated how big of a car you can drive on the road and requires special licensing for different classes and an eventual limit on how big things on the road can be. Imagine that.

    So if you want to compare XYZ to guns, do it from the right point of view using what is relavent...the fact that a object has existed in society, the object's reasong for existance and what has been done about the object.

    With that said, I agree 100% that licensing tests need to be greatly revised and much harder to pass and the age should be raised and more license classes...as in you have you have a license proving you have demonstrated the ability to navigate a Hummer H2 or a Nissan Armada properly. Pass regulation that seniors need to take exams/driving tests more often as they get older. Penalties for driving without a license should also be more harsh (not a suspended license...but having never had taken the exam at all).


    As far as guns go, I'm not anti-gun by any means. But at what point do you need some of these weapons that are currently available? Are you such a poor shot or unsure of your ability to use a gun that you need some crazy rifle? Are you going to go hunting with a Bushmaster M4? No. Are you carring a AR-15 down the street "just in case" someone tried to rob you? No. I'm sure anone with a head on their shoulders would say that a handgun is the proper tool in pretty much any case of defense. So what is the need that you can justify for one type of weapon that some people don't think have any use? Don't even get me started on all the bills that have been passed in years past that have actually made it hard to pass new regulation to have sensable and logical regulations to help reduce how guns end up in the hands of criminals...
    Few issues here. While i agree that you have the right to transportation, why does your car need to exceed 55 mph? Probably 1/2 the vehicles in america can double... sometimes triple the highest speed limit. Should we just ban corvettes? Camaros? Regulate vehicle speeds and weights? my argument wasnt limited to an all out car ban, i mentioned regulation as well.

    The question is, what is the correct regulation? and what is the purpose? You say guns are meant for killing.... i agree... so lets stretch that out a little further. Made for killing what? Rifle is primarily a hunting gun... even lumping all rifles into 1 group, including assault rifles.... rifles only accounted for 3** deaths last year. Handguns were literally more than 10x that amount. More people were killed by blunt objects than they were rifles. Why are assault rifles the ones that need to be regulated? statistically... theyre the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to violence. Do you really see street thugs running around with $2000 ARs robbing liquor stores? No, you dont.

    A cars purpose is for travel, so how do you justify any performance that goes above the definition of travel? Do cars need to go 50-60-70-80? where does it stop? What would be the criteria for these regulations.

    These are the questions i want answered before i accept any gun regulation. I dont accept rifles being banned based on perception. The most violent LOOKING gun.... just so happens to be the least violent gun statistically. It's also the gun with the most versatile purpose. Many use them for hunting, sport shooting... ect ect.

    I honestly do not see what is so ridiculous about this comparison.

  32. #32
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    one more thing... the government tyranny concept people keep saying is ridiculous....

    Do you think american government tyranny is IMPOSSIBLE? if so, why? I posted the statistics in the gun thread about how in the last 100 years more people have been killed by their own government than all wars combined. What makes this IMPOSSIBLE.... emphasis on IMPOSSIBLE... i understand it's unlikely.

  33. #33
    Slowest Car on IA David88vert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Age
    51
    Posts
    8,378
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
    I'll pull up the case law when I get home.
    I suspect this this is the case that you will cite:
    Donald S. MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sally R. REED, California Department of Motor Vehicles;  Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Defendants-Appellees 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals - 1999
    MILLER v. REED, No.

    As for Kent vs. Dulles (1958), it found that the right to travel is a liberty that can’t be denied without due process (5th Amendment); however, it did not say that the method of travel was a right, hence it it considered a priveledge on this case law, if taken as a single case. What is important to note is that neither state constitutions nor the US Constitution deal specifically with driving, hence, it is not a stated "right".

    The Supreme Court of the State of Georgia ruled that, "In this connection, it is well to keep in mind that, while the public has an absolute "RIGHT" to the use of the streets for their primary purpose, which is for travel, the use of the streets from the purpose of parking automobiles is a privilege, and not a "RIGHT"; and the privilege must be accepted with such reasonable burdens as the city may place as conditions to the exercise of that privilege." - Gardner v. City of Brunswick, 28 S.E.2d 135

    Let me clarify - driving and owning are not the same thing. Owning and driving on private land should not be considered the same as driving on public roads.
    We all have a right to travel on public roads; however, there is no statement, implied or inferred, that we have a right to operate a vehicle on public roads, hence, it is not a "right to drive"
    "Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen

  34. #34
    Senior Member | IA Veteran quickdodgeŽ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    In your soul
    Age
    53
    Posts
    71,805
    Rep Power
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David88vert View Post
    that we have a right to operate a vehicle on public roads, hence, it is not a "right to drive"
    Exactly how I knew it.
    FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!


  35. #35
    magical negro/photog .blank cd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    12,103
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    Any attempt to poke holes in the cloud that liberals live on is met with "that's stupid" or "youre a racist". Your party is so arrogant that theyre insulted that anyone questions them at all, doesnt matter how much merit the questioning may have.
    You, or anyone else here has yet to "poke any holes" in any "liberal clouds".

    NIKON Squad member 01

    I HAVE SUBS AND CAMERAS AND LENSES FO SALE
    OF*C
    OEMFitment Crew Memeber 01

  36. #36
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
    You, or anyone else here has yet to "poke any holes" in any "liberal clouds".
    You believing this does nothing other than further prove my claims. While i admit you are a formidable adversary...

    you have been shit on more than a few times by the other "righties" on this forum.
    Last edited by Sinfix_15; 01-18-2013 at 11:25 PM.

  37. #37
    magical negro/photog .blank cd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    12,103
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinfix_15 View Post
    You believing this does nothing other than further prove my claims. While i admit you are a formidable adversary...

    you have been shit on more than a few times by the other "righties" on this forum.
    Hasn't happened.

    NIKON Squad member 01

    I HAVE SUBS AND CAMERAS AND LENSES FO SALE
    OF*C
    OEMFitment Crew Memeber 01

  38. #38
    Senior Member | IA Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    11,435
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
    Hasn't happened.
    oooook

  39. #39
    Senior Member C230K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Idk you tell me
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I highly doubt that you Sinfix would trade the keys to your 100mph+ motorcycle for a breeze card from Marta


    AFA HOLLYWOOD PREMIER LEAGUE EST. 1998


  40. #40
    Senior Member | IA Veteran quickdodgeŽ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    In your soul
    Age
    53
    Posts
    71,805
    Rep Power
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C230K View Post
    I highly doubt that you Sinfix would trade the keys to your 100mph+ motorcycle for a breeze card from Marta
    I highly doubt that as well seeing as how he doesn't live on, or near, the Marta line.
    FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!


Page 1 of 55 123451151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
ImportAtlanta is a community of gearheads and car enthusiasts. It does not matter what kind of car or bike you drive, IA is an open community for any gearhead. Whether you're looking for advice on a performance build or posting your wheels for sale, you're welcome here!
Announcement
Welcome back to ImportAtlanta. We are currently undergoing many changes, so please report any issues you encounter with the site using the 'Contact Us' button below. Thank you!