There’s a well known Troll who likes to move the goal posts, and has often declared we can’t compare cars and guns. We just can’t, no reason given we just can’t.
An 80-year-old central New York man who served prison time for a beating death in the 1960s is facing up to 18 years behind bars for killing a man in a road-rage accident…In November 2009, authorities said LeVea was drunk when he used his vehicle to repeatedly ram the pickup truck driven by 41-year-old Christopher Spack of Camillus, causing him to crash into another truck. Spack was killed in the collision.
So much right in that one story. We have a violent ex-con who was sentenced for a beating death (another story for the “Gun Death?” files), he’s 80 years old…it ain’t just the young ones. He was driving drunk, also illegal, and he used his vehicle to kill another man.
This is the world the Anti-Rights activists want for us. I don’t want to live there!
h/t Zercool
We can’t really compare cars to guns actually because cars are so incredibly much more dangerous they should be in a class of their own! If we look at Wikipedia, a 200 gr. .45 ACP bullet going 330 m/s has 702 Joules of energy.
With some rough back of the envelope calculations for a typical pickup truck, say, about 10,000 pounds, going 60 mph, and running it though some conversions and E=(1/2)*(mass)*(velocity)^2, we find that the pickup has about 1,630,000 Joules of energy.
Ummm… exactly HOW many orders of magnitude difference is there? I am continually surprised that our resident rights restrictors allow sixteen year old boys to run the streets with these things, while trying to ban a tiny little chamber of chemical energy, but I guess no one has ever accused out politicians of being good with math…
Or have cars come AT eachother with nothing but a paint line seperating them. Try suggesting something like that at your gun club.
Seems Sparky’s values and reasons shift constantly.
Sometimes it is okay to compare cars
<blockquote?I'm willing to abandon. at least temporarily, my distrust of gun/car comparisons. Microdot is absolutely right. This comparison works.
January 18, 2011 11:28 AM
From Jadegold’s post on requiring ‘gun loons’ to carry insurance
Goal posts must always have good mobility!
Gun-banners like to say “But cars are designed to go from point A to point B, and guns are designed to kill!” With that in mind, do you know what’s rather incredible? That devices designed for transportation kill more people than devices designed to kill–despite the fact that devices designed to kill are the preferred devices for both murder and suicide!
Gun Banners like to hold all the cars. my S&W1911Sc is now sold as the S&W1911PD, “PD” being a suffix added to S&W guns designed for Personal Defense. That’s what they’re designed for, and that’s why I personally own them.
But the antis don’t accept that when people discuss purpose of design….just the same way they don’t want to talk about guns based off the Mauser K98 action (or the near identical 1903 Springfield action) being designed as an implement of war and global domination (The Mauser Bolt gun was used in both World War I and WW II, which had an end-game of Empire for the Germans) even tho most Mauser-actions are now used in hunting guns.
And of course the AR-15 is a dominant gun in NRA High-Power, and there are countless AWB restricted guns and magazines used in IPSC and multi-gun.
But those sports also don’t count as “Sporting Use”
And of course in the end Justifiable Homicide states that there are perfectly legitimate to kill another person in the correct legal circumstances, so owning an implement that is capable of doing that actually makes perfect sense.