What If a Sports Car Traveling 135+ MPH Hit a School Bus and Killed 26 Kids?

[victwin]

Hit and run statistics in the L.A. area are rising to epidemic levels:

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2...pd_answers.php

In this article it states that "4,000 of the 20,000 annual hit-and-runs are felonies, involving an injury or death." That's more than 10 injuries or deaths per day due to hit and run accidents. Of course no one is talking about criminalizing the average L.A. car owner/driver nor are they talking about banning or neutering their cars. That's because most people know that autos are everyday tools at the command of the people driving them. The people committing these hit and runs are the ones that should be criminalized and not the cars themselves. Also everyone knows that the majority of drivers/car owners in L.A. and nationally are law abiding citizens exercising their privilege to drive. As firearm owners we understand the parallel logic with respect to our situations with one major caveat in the fact that the ability to own a firearm is a constitutional right and not simply a privilege. Unfortunately non-firearm owners seem to be quick to demonize guns in general and a few classes of firearms specifically.

The answer to curbing the L.A. hit and run epidemic is through a combination of stronger enforcement of the existing laws and civic involvement (making sure fellow drivers report any witnessed hit and run events). There's no reason why curbing criminal gun violence can't be controlled the same way. I know that it will be very difficult to convince strong anti-gun activists of this argument. But I believe arguing parallels to things that people who don't know much about firearms and who may be sitting on the fence regarding the gun debate should be tried.

[Keith A]

I have seen this argument on facebook a few times. What it usually boils down to is antis screaming about how cars are not DESIGNED as murder weapons, so any comparison is irrelavent.
They are not interested in decreasing deaths, they are interested in getting rid of guns. Because , you know, they are like, scary and all.

[Thursday]

There would be endless news coverage of it, people would call it a tragedy and then a sign marking the spot with the date would be erected at that spot.

The crash im referring to killed 27, injured 34. Nothing ever came of that.


Guy who hit them had a BAC of over .20.

There's the answer to your question OP.

This is like comparing Apples and a shiny G-string for one simple reason, the idiot masses are afraid of guns because they refuse to educate themselves or their children about guns and gun safety.

It's sick, it really is, I had a sort of confrontation with a woman in Pitt in October in a Promanti brothers while waiting for a pizza.

A woman was sitting there waiting on takeout, yammering away on her phone, this woman's son wanted to play a hunting game and she responded by pulling her phone away from her ear (head out of her ass) and then yelling at her son saying things like "Guns are stupid" and "only cowards carry guns" and going on and on, I asked her if that was the right message to send her son and she said that she wouldn't ever need a gun because only someone who is afraid of the world owns a gun.

I simply responded that the people with guns are the ones that protect her right to have diarrhea of the mouth, I got my pizza and left and proceeded to have a great date night with my wife, I'm sure she was bitter the rest of the week/month/probably still is.

Sorry, rant off.

[GeneCC]

It would be called a "tragedy" and viewers would flip to the next channel.

This is in part why Obama wants to "get moving" on new gun control laws. The very forces which want to disarm us also want to make profit from News Services and Violent Movies. People's hearts grow calloused and indifferent from the same sources of discord.

[GeneCC]

I have seen this argument on facebook a few times. What it usually boils down to is antis screaming about how cars are not DESIGNED as murder weapons

I asked a young lady who said this to me if Police should have their handguns taken away because "Police are not Judge, Jury and Executioner" so they "do not need handguns".


She double talked around it, including saying that Police were "part of the Army" or "a militia".

Eventually she dropped that tactic.


If Policemen need to defend themselves with handguns then handguns are not intended for murder, are they?




In contrast if the Maximum speed limit in Pennsylvania is 65 miles an hour exactly why do people NEED a vehicle that will go double that speed limit, including not just the drive train but high speed tires, handling equipment and.... Radar Detectors!!!

Maybe because they sometimes want to visit close track and test their skills? Maybe they like to "let her rip" in quiet stretches of highway.

Maybe they want to be free to behave in a peaceable manner?