Ohio school gunman kills self, wounds 4

[Caladan 19]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

[eric&gen 0]

Ban cars and guns all together.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

[Caladan 19]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

[Peikko 1,575]

Let's see, I want to kill someone, what would I choose?

A gun, designed for the purpose of killing, can adequately do this whether I am an expert or not so long as I choose something big enough and maybe just to be sure add some really nasty ammunition.

A car, not designed to kill, it can do it, but there is pretty much no guarantee that it will do so because I would need speed to kill (car manufactures do try to ensure that if a car hits someone at low speeds they won't kill) and for the person to stay still as I approach.

Hmm, difficult choice.

[natty bumppo 297]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

its about people .... not the object

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

back to your corner, no need to throw more gas on the fire

[Caladan 19]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

back to your corner, no need to throw more gas on the fire

Why not, we could toast marshmallows.

Natty Bumpo, if they're exactly the same, then either the second amendment is talking about cars, or it's NOT talking about guns.

[natty bumppo 297]

Let's see, I want to kill someone, what would I choose?

A gun, designed for the purpose of killing, can adequately do this whether I am an expert or not so long as I choose something big enough and maybe just to be sure add some really nasty ammunition.

A car, not designed to kill, it can do it, but there is pretty much no guarantee that it will do so because I would need speed to kill (car manufactures do try to ensure that if a car hits someone at low speeds they won't kill) and for the person to stay still as I approach.

Hmm, difficult choice.

oh ... so ... lets see ... get hit with 3500# car moving at 25 mph ... while you are ... lets say running away

you first bounce off the car (solid mass) .. crack you head open on the road ... then for added bonus you are the speed bump ... and your personal crush zone will protect you ?

[Peikko 1,575]

No, it's about getting one particular supposed responsible gun owner to quit fannying around with the 'cars are as deadly as guns' argument and admit that guns are designed to kill, are pretty darned efficient at doing so, and that care and respect should be taken when handling them.

I personally would argue that when not in use, guns should be locked up, but that's another debate.

[derekkj 0]

Well, of course there are cases of people plowing their cars into crowds. Too lazy to do a google on it right now, but the one that springs to my mind is the lady in DC who drove into a crowded street festival and injured scores of people just a few months ago. And at least several times a year, there is some old fogie who can't see above the steering wheel that takes out a few people. One might argue that the majority of these incidents are more like drunk driving than intentional, but what about the woman who mowed her husband down and then kept running him over until she was pulled out of the car?

And I have said this before, but no, not all guns are designed to be kill other human beings. (And yes, I am too lazy to rewrite this so a lot of it is just cut and pasted from an old thread.) The one firearm that I own, a Colt .22 caliber Woodsman, is solely for target shooting. I don't carry it concealed (the special grips on it that stabilize my hand better than regular grips would make it far too bulky for that) and I don't keep it at home for protection (even if I did, if some crazed person high on drugs broke into my house, a .22 probably wouldn't even slow them down.) If you are interested, I can provide you with other examples of guns, (rifles, handguns and shotguns) that were made specifically for the shooting sports, such as trap and skeet, not to inflict harm on a human body. The shooting sports, by the way, are one of the oldest Olympic sports, and take a great deal of discipline, concentration and coordination to master.

Besides the shooting sports, there are a whole lot of gun collectors out there who wouldn't even dream of shooting the high dollar guns that they have because it would diminish their value. They collect them for the history they represent, the craftsmanship that went into making them, or other sentimental or nostalgic reasons. Sorta like how expensive cars can turn into "garage art."

And I am sure there are more than a few people in the world who use firearms to provide food for their family, but don't hunt so I'll let someone else take that on. But sufficed to say, I am willing to bet that the majority of guns out there (and gun owners) have never injured or killed a human.

[natty bumppo 297]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

back to your corner, no need to throw more gas on the fire

Why not, we could toast marshmallows.

Natty Bumpo, if they're exactly the same, then either the second amendment is talking about cars, or it's NOT talking about guns.

we are talking about people and responsibility ... doesn't matter the tool (vehicle if you will) used to kill. dead is dead when someone intentionally kills you

[Peikko 1,575]

I'd rather run away from a car being driven at 25mph. I think my survival chances would be pretty darned good. I wouldn't think much of my chances running away from a bullet.

No one is arguing death isn't death.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I'd rather run away from a car being driven at 25mph. I think my survival chances would be pretty darned good. I wouldn't think much of my chances running away from a bullet.

No one is arguing death isn't death.

bad news.......i don't think you'll outrun it

[natty bumppo 297]

I'd rather run away from a car being driven at 25mph. I think my survival chances would be pretty darned good. I wouldn't think much of my chances running away from a bullet.

No one is arguing death isn't death.

guess it depends on the shooter ... and driver. bad shooter ... good driver can quickly change the equation. either case is not a good option.

it's the responsibility factor thats missing. it's been said a drunk driver is not responsible (no intent) yet essentially straps themselves into a vehicle that can very quickly become a death delivering device .... just like a gun.

responsibility ? where is it ? who is responsilbe ? the individual? friends? others? to prevent either example from happening (gun/ murderous drunk driver)