Posted on 04/21/2014 7:52:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Driving on our roads is a privilege regulated at the state level through licensing.
Gun ownership is a civil right guaranteed in the Constitution.
Those facts in mind, lets have a look at another of Everytowns propaganda graphics.
That graphic implies quite a lot. If Bloomberg were to get his way, police or some other government agency would be mandated to step into gun owners homes at regular intervals to keep tabs on the firearms and the people in those homes.
We are already seeing a disturbing, even frightening, militarization of local police. Federal agencies that have no real police power now have heavily armed SWAT-style units.
Bloomberg would add to all of that, having police inspect every firearm owners home.
Thats literally a police state.
Just how does a car attend training, pass a written test, and practicle test?
I always thought driving on a highway or road should be a right not a privilege. Now if I get drunk and kill someone, charge me with murder.
Otherwise leave me and my car alone.
Devil’s Advocate:
Was riding by horse or carriage a “privilege?”
MOST minorities conceived in NYC are killed in-utero:
How about the same measures put on guns to be imposed on women seeking abortions..?
Test, registration, health requirements, etc.
In Germany, Britain, Australia, the Scandahoovian nations, etc., the police show up at your door, no warrant necessary, & demand, “You own guns according to our records. May we have a look around?”
Our future if we’re not careful.
Seems I am unable to find which amendment ensures the right to drive. Any clues would be appreciated.
Statists believe that rights come into being only after the government gives the ok.
The important thing is that we get guns off the streets, the faster, the better.
The fastest way to get hundreds of thousands of guns off the streets is quite simple. Disarm the police. We know they have the guns, And assuming that the police would actually follow the law, you would expect them to turn in their guns.
Next, go after the criminals and get them to turn in their guns. I’m sure they’ll be quite cooperative.
Seriously though, their cognitive disconnect is really astounding... In order to protect people, we must make sure they’re not able to protect themselves. Sort of like destroying a village to save it... But then, wasn’t that a government idea too?
Mark
Driving is a privilege not a right. Bearing arms on the other hand, is a constitutional right.
Just don’t look for Mike Bloomberg to understand the difference.
That’s funny!
And the razor/knife-point front sight looks perfect for gutting deer.
Maybe the blind squirrel found a nut. Maybe cars ARE too regulated. If two arenas both work to some extent or other, but there's a discrepancy in the level of regulation, why on earth would people assume the LOWER one is the one that's wrong?? I'd assume that if both were doing well, that the HIGHER one might have more regulation than necessary. At least try a lower level till you can prove it's not adequate.
Title and tag at point of sale? You don't get a title to a car until you are done paying for it. The "tag" is put on the car at the factory. I don't see any rational equivalent in buying a gun. I can go to my local car dealership and buy a car outright, without proof of insurance, without a drivers license, without a background check, without a health check, without an eye exam, without anything they are intending that the little people need to get to buy a gun. I can do this with any car that is offered for sale. I could do it for armored cars, race cars, tractor trailers, evil SUVs, even tanks, what have you. Further I could make any type of car I want in my back yard and it's perfectly legal. Let me know when I can go to my local gun store and buy a full auto, silenced, .89 caliber rifle or make one in my back yard legally.
Driver training, written tests, practical tests are really just a way of saying "license" which I notice they shy away from. If you require a license then you don't have a right. Regardless do you need a drivers license to own a car? No. Do you need a drivers license to drive a car? No. You only need a drivers license to drive a car on public roads. This would be the equivalent of only needing a license for carrying a gun in public, but once you had that license you could carry it anywhere, in any state which they argue against vehemently with current carry "permits". Regardless what would be next, a license in order to practice your religion or free speech. How about a written exam in order to be able to vote? We can't even ask for positive ID for voting. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Health requirements?
All they do is a eye exam to get a drivers license. Regardless even a blind person can buy a car. They can register it in their name, get it insured and keep it on their property as long as they can pay for it. They just can't drive it on public roads.
Liability insurance? This isn't a requirement to own a car or even to drive a car on public streets in many states. It isn't a requirement in any state if it isn't going to be used on public roads.
Renewals and inspections at intervals? I love the way they shy away from the term "registration". Only cars that are driven on public streets need to be registered and inspected so obviously their position is that we only need to register and have inspected the firearm(s) we intend to carry. Right?
Even when they try to sound reasonable they make very little sense, and they most assuredly do not mean what they say.
Don't let them feed you the Kool-Aid. Far more reasonable to view it as a right, subject to limitation only to make sure your exercise of it doesn't violate someone else's rights. Financial responsibility for tort purposes, for example, perfectly legitimate. Viewing it as a privilege leads to all sorts of chicanery like tying it to taxes, child-support, school grades, etc. (things having nothing to do with whether you're safe on the road or not).
Introduce the internal combustion engine and suddenly the government has the power to "allow" you to engage in the predominant form or travel, or not. The fact that they need to be involved in creating roads and so on, I realize bears on the issue, but if they couldn't figure out how to introduce the new system with no loss of liberty or autonomy on the part of their superiors (us), then it wasn't ready for prime time and shouldn't have been rolled out till they COULD do so.
- radical gay little mikey bloomberg had $6B when he first became NYC Mayor
- he legally continued to run bloomie inc. himself while Mayor
- after his last term ended he bought the votes and ran again for NYC Mayor
- mikey bloomberg is now worth $31B using his media to promote himself
- he employs an armed private police force to protect him
I think Bloomberg should be banned from having armed security.
if guns were regulated like abortion,....
> It sure looks like Bloomberg is running for US President in 2016!
Gun Control, Sugar Drink Control, etc. His money will have bipartisan support.
I hope he wastes every dime he owns trying to get elected....
You don’t need a Driver’s License to drive a Car on Private Property.
Your Car doesn’t have to be Registered if it isn’t driven or parked on a Public Street.
If we were being technical, two ton Vehicles could be considered “Arms”, just as Guns, Knives, Baseball Bats and Rolling Pins could be considered Arms. In fact, a famous Democrat Senator used an Assault Oldsmobile to kill a young girl as I remember.
We could go on and on, but a flawed Premise thought up by some Freedom Hating Progressive Tyrants is just that, flawed from the roots and rotten to the core.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.