The Black Vault

So... the Senate democrats wants to take another stab at our 2nd amendment right of gun ownership? (Source: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/ ... lt-weapons) Well, hear me out. This will only take a moment. If you feel guns should be banned, have you ever looked at the deaths associated with motor vehicles? I'll use the same logic you are using about taking away guns.

It is estimated that there are 310 MILLION guns in America as of 2009 (Source: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf) It is estimated there are 254 MILLION motor vehicles (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_ ... f_vehicles). Yet, in 90% of the states, vehicle deaths outnumber, and in many cases FAR outnumber, gun deaths (Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... least.html).

Many left wing publications are touting more gun control, and even my source above touts "more deaths by guns than vehicles by 2015." And this is an argument for more gun control. Actually, I think if you are going after guns, you should first cut down on super charged motor vehicles and ban cars altogether. That would decrease considerably the amount of deaths in our country and keep our kids safer. Right? I mean, it's the same logic and would actually save MORE people. Ooops. Don't want your car taken away?

There are just as many, if not more (Source: My opinion) crazy people that get behind the wheel after drinking excessively, road raging about a bad day, furious and speeding off after a fight with their spouse, etc. They kill (see the attached chart) at rates HIGHER than guns (MORE guns than vehicles... LESS deaths by guns - it isn't rocket science to see which is statistically safer).

Some people like their super charged automobiles. They like to go VROOOM while others (like me) like to go BOOM. So what's the difference if its legal? If we do it safely, regardless of our toy of choice, what does it really matter to you? You think your kids aren't or can't be killed by drunk drivers? You think kids aren't killed by speeding teenagers in daddy's Porsche? Trust me... they are. And I knew that situation all too well in High School.

So the next time you support someone like Senator Feinstein on gun control - look at the facts.

"Don't bother me with the facts... my mind is made up."

-- http://www.theblackvault.com/

There is a body of law to regulate motor vehicle's use and possession. No, they are not 100% effective but better than nothing, imho.

As there is with guns... and the numbers and statistics show per number... motor vehicles are more lethal.

Ban them?

A ban on motor vehicles isn't going to happen, though there is a ban on some of them already, those that aren't "street legal." And why aren't street illegal cars street legal? By and large, because they are woefully unsafe. And yes I do think some motor vehicles should be banned.

I think it was capricorn who said somewhere that if guns were to be banned for their danger, then all dangerous things should be banned. Q-tips were cited, probably in jest. But if that principle were reversed, it would seem equally absurd: if no dangerous things should be banned, then we should allow people to make and carry dirty nukes on their backs.

After all, it's not the nukes that kill people, it's people that kill people.

The millions of families affected by one detonation would have preferred the bomber to have been armed with just Q-tips, I imagine.

And so the line must be drawn somewhere. At what level of lethality do we draw the line? In my opinion there shouldn't be any drastic changes. I would say current gun control is actually effective given that the Connecticut event doesn't happen more frequently.

Yeah, but you can't compare nukes to guns. There is a huge difference. Let's see... Hiroshima... or a 30 round magazine... yeah... it's the same.

The logic in that argument simply doesn't exist.

Then you must be suggesting that the weapon used does matter.

I thought it was people that killed people...

If you want to talk about GUNS.... then let's talk about guns. But you want to bring up NUKES and say, what? I am a hypocrite? I am illogical?

Clearly gun control advocates can do better than that?

And just to add to that, with your logic, if the weapon doesn't matter, and if it kills it kills... then on the ban list:

Knives
Guns
Cars
Busses
Tractors
Hands
Feet
Bottles
Glass objects

Oh, and anything that can be sharpened.

Please also... let's get Senator Feinstein to ban pencils.

Because... once guns are taken away... these will pop up in schools everywhere

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-a ... 0923_n.jpg

The government and big businesses both think on a level of total stupidity sometimes and not common sense. They have known for decades DUI is the majority of annual deaths in cars, but we still do not put a total ban on drinking and driving.

My company banned something every kid use to love getting for Christmas, at least boys. Being a avid model maker, all boys love to get a complete set of exacto knives. They came in a cool wooden box, 3 holders, and variety of blade shapes. My company, because one person in the office cut himself with his exacto knife, banned them in the entire company, and went on a rampage over things with blades we used everyday in the shops. Master machinists, toolmakers, journeymen in every trade, being told they could not have an exacto knife.

This is the level of stupid logic, we are going to see with gun proposals. All will come from the same dumb asses who banned exacto knives, that never had one. Anything takes a little learning, imagine telling a Behihana Chef, he would not have an exacto knife at work.