Nearly all vehicular deaths are from accidents: human error or mechanical failure, often complicated by weather. A guy runs a red light and plows into a minivan. Texting while driving. Driving too fast for conditions. Badly-time medical issue (saw that one personally and helped the couple until firefighters could down down into the streambed). Blown tire. Engine fire. Suspension failure. Driving the wrong way down the highway. Rockslide. Bad lane change. Blinded by the sun.
Very few gun-related deaths are accidents. Most are suicides or homicides; a very small fraction are justifiable homicide (police or citizen) or accidents. And the accidents are, again, mostly due to human error, typically a handling issue. There are a very few cases per year where a gun spontaneously discharges without the operator directly or indirectly moving the trigger. They can happen, of course; older guns may lack modern hammer-blocking mechanisms to prevent discharge from a sharp impact. And all guns are mechanical devices, so the innards are subject to wear and the occasional failure. Taurus Manufacturing, a Brazilian gun maker, recently settled a class-action suit that claimed the safety mechanism of several lines of handguns were flawed and would allow discharges even with the safety on.
Because liability insurance doesn't protect the policyholder when the holder commits a crime, buying a policy for a gun is pretty useless. If I kill myself with my own gun, how and who can I sue? I'm dead and I only shot myself! If I murder somebody with my gun, my insurance company won't protect me because I committed a crime. If I am defending myself and accidentally shoot somebody... well, either I'm guilty of negligence, or my attacker is responsible. In either case, I don't think my insurance would cover me. Maybe an insurance expert knows more about that scenario, though.
So comparing guns to cars is a bad analogy in general. We register and tax cars because cars emit, as a routine and normal part of everyday use, pollutants that require mitigation and regulation. Cars, also as a normal part of everyday use, cause wear and tear on the public roads that were built for them. Cars are dozens of times more expensive than guns, and as such personal property are subject to taxes. My car costs me about $90 a year in property taxes. In addition, registration also provides a clear path of ownership of this expensive property for transfers. Unlike guns, it is difficult to operate an unregistered vehicle in public, and storing one on private land requires considerable square footage.
But let's get back to your post. Cars are allowed on all public streets. I do not see any laws barring cars within 500 feet of a school, for example. Or from houses of worship, governmental buildings, malls, cinemas, etc.
My comment about "assault cars" was a criticism of the definition of "assault weapon" commonly used in past, present, and proposed gun legislation. An analogy between "assault car" and "assault weapon" would go something like this:
An assault car is defined as a motorized passenger vehicle with two or more of the following features:
* Ground clearance of less than 3 inches
* A protruding aerodynamic device
* Tinted windows
* Rims more than 17" in diameter.
All owners of assault cars will have to register their assault cars by a certain date, at which point the registry will be permanently closed. After that date, owners of unregistered assault cars will have to either sell their assault car to people in other states that do not ban assault cars, or remove the banned features to make the car compliant. Assault cars that are registered cannot be sold or given to other owners in the state, even if that owner already owns other assault cars, nor can they be inherited by any state resident.
And yeah, it is the size of the tank. On a gun it's called a magazine, and there are several states that limit magazine capacity to an arbitrary number, usually ten rounds. Only one state, New Jersey, has its own ban on what goes in the magazine (they ban hollowpoint bullets). Yeah, there is a federal law that bans armor-piercing pistol ammunition based on the composition of the bullet, but outside of that it's a wide-open field.
I will also point out that nearly all states issue concealed-carry permits which require a background check, and often includes multi-hour training course (often by an NRA-certified instructor) followed by a written and/or practical handing test. Several states do not require a permit to carry concealed.
So... cars versus guns... bad analogy, yes?
[/center]
[/center]
= new reply since forum marked as read
