Isn't outlawing guns to stop killing exactly like outlawing cars to stop drunk driving?

MitchHellman

There's an important difference between cars and guns: cars can be used for a variety of purposes, but guns HAVE NO OTHER PURPOSE THAN BLOWING HOLES IN THINGS.

Brokekid

yeah, I would have to agree with you. It's the culture behind the abuse that needs to change.

Chrysostom

No. Cars serve a useful purpose. The purpose of a gun is to hurt and kill.

The intended use of a car can be abused. The intention of a gun is to hurt and kill, without its use being abused. Guns are pointless unless they serve their primary purpose - you're only playing games unless you use a gun for its purpose.

Outlaw needless guns for the public - they're harmful objects of power wielding.

Dave

No. Guns have no purpose other than to injure or kill. That's what they do. Automobiles are made to transport people from one place to another. In the wrong hands, like a drunk's, they can be dangerous, but their only reason for existing is not to kill like a gun's. By your logic, if you call it that, you should also ban electricity and bathtubs because they can injury and harm.

stumble_bee

I agree 100%. Taking away a means to kill someone does nothing to solve the problem of somones desire to kill someone.

yes

9er

But the difference is that our country isn't really set up (with reliable and far-reaching public transportation in all areas) to handle an entire populace without cars. They are necessary, to some degree. No average citizen needs guns to live or work.

Pango

Yes. I guess it is. All we need is a few restrictions here and there. Guns don't kill, people do!

bobweb

Our Constitution gives us the "right to bear arms", but not for unlawful purposes. When a high school student kills a bunch of fellow students with a gun, that's unlawful. When a robber holds up a store or bank with a gun, that's unlawful. Guns can be both a citizen's protection from threats, and a threat to society when used against society. So you want to retain your right to have a gun, but you don't want innocent people to be hurt by them.
I say the eventual solution to this problem will be guns that only discharge for legitimate reasons. For example, guns licensed for home protection should be programmed to only discharge within the confines of your home when used by the licensed individuals. If your son or daughter tries to take them to school, they are automatically inoperative. So technology will eventually allow us to control guns the way everyone wants them to be controlled. And that is for legitimate, law abiding reasons.

seth677

yes

ku_lok

Well stated.

auto_racing77

Guns are for killing people and that's it!
Cars are for driving and not for running over pedestrians and causing accidents killing people!

russell1775

Most people that own firearms legally don't kill other people. The majority of firearm related deaths are from illegal firearms

toiletbowl.martini

I like the classic saying, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

g3010

You are right and there are more people killed every year with automobiles then there are guns, the government will tell you the same thing if you ask your congress/person.

Always Right

yes

SteadfastOne

Yes, I believe it is much the same. I believe those who think that outlawing guns should stop murder are not thinking through the problem at all. After all, the first murder was not committed with a gun; they hadn't even been invented yet. It seems that the liberal part of our society doesn't wish to stand up and be counted when it comes to punishing criminals. The death penalty is the strongest deterrent available to a society in dealing with the crime of murder. It actually works when carried out in a timely manner against the criminal.

Kyle M

No, of course not.

There is absolutely no legitimate use for guns, whereas the entire economy of the U.S. would come to a stop if cars were outlawed.

itsmeagain06

No, it would be the same as outlawing alchohol. I do see where you are going with this and our law makers should make our criminal justice system work harder, they shouldn't punnish law abiding responsible citizens because of idiot criminals.

Creature

No. It is not the same. If you think it is, perhaps we should start the equivelant of the NRA, to protect the rights of those who own cars.

Our culture has a very loud and angry minority that is obsessed with blocking any form of gun control. Surely guns for sport should and may already have some form of inherent right to possess, but the need to have automatic weapons available to the average Joe should not.

iam1lasthope

yes

irunwithscissors25

yes i agree

joe916

Absolutly! neither mix well wih alchohol though. The lawmakers are just placing a bandaid on the wound. The real problem is within our society.

jdb392

I agree to a point. Some people only think that guns serve only a destructive purpose and with this I totally disagree. I enjoy target shooting. I see this as a sport with a high degree of difficulty. A golf club could also be used to kill or even a golf ball at high velocity. I do not hear anyone looking to ban golf.

ne-ne

4 - sho

bill

wow, i thought if i answerd this, i might be a phyco for having a intrest in firearms... i agree with u.
like the proverb, "gun's dont kill people, people kill people"!

thepawnbrokerroared

An analogy between guns and cars would be weak because cars are not weapons, they are a means of transportation. A car can be used as a weapon (when a driver *deliberately* runs someone over) but this only happens rarely and this is not the primary function or intended use of a car.

The analogy between those who use guns to kill and drunk drivers is stronger. Drunk drivers do not intend to kill but the law says that there is an element of intention in their recklessness. Using a gun irresponsibly and driving a car irresponsibly can both amount to reckless behaviour likely to endanger life. This is why cars are legal but drunk driving is not illegal. You could argue that, in the same way, guns themselves should not be illegal, just the irresponsible or aggressive use of guns.

However, an appeal for consistency between guns and cars would have to take into account the perceived benefits for society of allowing each. Although cars cause thousands of deaths every year, cars remain legal because society considers them a necessary means of transportation and we cannot evisage a life without cars. It is possible, however, to imagine a life without private gun ownership because there are many developed nations where private gun ownership is strictly controlled. Advocates of gun control would point to the murder rate in those countries, in comparison to the US, to argue that there is a connection between private gun ownership and a high murder rate. In contrast, there is no developed country that has outlawed cars.

Neverheless, the weakness of the gun-control argument would be in the post hoc argument that America has a high leven of gun ownership and a high murder rate, therefore, it must be the high level of gun ownership that *causes* the high murder rate. The gun lobby's argument is that America's murder rate might be even higher if law abiding citizens were not allowed to have guns to protect themselves. It is this argument of causation that would need to be resolved if there is ever to be a consensus in the gun control debate in the US.

toomuchfun

finally someone who gets it ,YES! guns dont kill people kill!any way the outlaw will still find a gun but us law obiding folks will be helpless .

ferret

Not really. More like outlawing alcohol to stop violent abuse but even then its tenuous. The problem with a gun is that it is designed for the specific job of killing. It is very efficient and if put in the hands of a psycho will kill a lot of people. Cars are not designed to kill, they are a means of transport. There are relatively few cases of multiple deaths caused by wilfully driving a car (sober or drunk) into a number of people with the purpose of causing death. The same cannot be said of guns.

year 2000, 42,000 road deaths. 11,000 homicides (with a firearm) 16,000 suicides. Alcohol related deaths - wait for it over 100,000

bird boy

possibly

calada

of-course not guns cause nothing but harm and should be banned world wide. cars on the other hand are a means of transportation. it isn't until someone decides to drink and drive that there is a danger present.no disrespect but a better comparison would oh been to outlaw alcohol and guns.instead of cars and guns.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: