Police say a mother is facing a child endangerment charge after her toddler found a gun in her purse and accidentally fired it in a southern Ohio Walmart store last week
And any dumbass who tries to equate the two to justify mass firearm proliferation, just tell them to defend their homes with cars and knives just the same.
Then they’ll raise their hands and go, “whoa whoa, hey now…”
Cars are not technically necessary. But we regulate them heavily - through licensing, safety tests, and policing. And your license can be pulled or suspended so that you cannot drive.
Why? Because they are deadly. Just because something isn’t created to kill (say… To protect your family? To get you to your job?) doesn’t mean it can’t kill.
Sadly, we live in a country where freedom and rights are valued more than community and respect.
But as the welcome to nightvale NRA says: “Guns don’t kill people. We’re all invincible and it’s a miracle.” (Podcast.)
I mean, a part of me would sooner say “yes, they are both needlessly dangerous and costly to society, which is why a society structured around needing and allowing either mass guns or cars is stupid.”
The US has more car deaths than anywhere else in the world, by far. Like guns, it’s a real “This is not preventable, says only country where this happens” vibe.
Some cars will always be necessary. The crazy delusional obsession with car dependence that happens literally nowhere else in the world is not necessary.
Based on what? I’ve given actual arguments and you haven’t. What a bad faith response.
My claim is modest: there are easily preventable harms to both widespread use of guns and cars, evidenced by the fact that the US is a HUGE outlier in both.
If anyone wants to further argue, note the issue is that we’ve built a country where cars are necessary. (And yet not so necessary that someone’s license can’t be suspended!) However, there is no reason why this can’t be changed. Saying it can’t is limiting our future to also think cars are necessary. They aren’t. They are useful in many places. But you could do without them if as a society we decided to do that. Dream bigger everyone! Have a world where you DON’T need to sit in traffic every day. Where you DON’T wait at red light after red light. Where you DON’T need to be a designated driver for your friends. Where you DON’T fear the day your vision gets so bad you lose your independence. Where you DON’T need to spend hundreds on insurance and car purchases and parking tickets and everything else. If we don’t dream it, we can’t ask for it. And if we don’t ask for it, what we have now will be what we’re stuck with.
(And if you want to have a car and have fun - sure! But then it’ll be extra fun when it’s not a requirement and fewer cars are on the road!)
deleted by creator
That’s fair
And any dumbass who tries to equate the two to justify mass firearm proliferation, just tell them to defend their homes with cars and knives just the same.
Then they’ll raise their hands and go, “whoa whoa, hey now…”
Cars are not technically necessary. But we regulate them heavily - through licensing, safety tests, and policing. And your license can be pulled or suspended so that you cannot drive.
Why? Because they are deadly. Just because something isn’t created to kill (say… To protect your family? To get you to your job?) doesn’t mean it can’t kill.
Sadly, we live in a country where freedom and rights are valued more than community and respect.
But as the welcome to nightvale NRA says: “Guns don’t kill people. We’re all invincible and it’s a miracle.” (Podcast.)
Do not approach the dog park.
… my phone is always dying so I think I’d like living in a desert otherworld where my phone mysteriously never dies
We have car insurance, but not gun insurance.
https://locktonaffinityoutdoor.com/personal-firearm-liability/
The critical difference is that auto insurance is (usually) required, while firearm insurance is not.
I mean, a part of me would sooner say “yes, they are both needlessly dangerous and costly to society, which is why a society structured around needing and allowing either mass guns or cars is stupid.”
deleted by creator
The US has more car deaths than anywhere else in the world, by far. Like guns, it’s a real “This is not preventable, says only country where this happens” vibe.
Some cars will always be necessary. The crazy delusional obsession with car dependence that happens literally nowhere else in the world is not necessary.
deleted by creator
Very similar to a gun advocate. It’s what you’re used to and you’ve already made up your mind, actual arguments or evidence be damned.
deleted by creator
Based on what? I’ve given actual arguments and you haven’t. What a bad faith response.
My claim is modest: there are easily preventable harms to both widespread use of guns and cars, evidenced by the fact that the US is a HUGE outlier in both.
Agreed.
If anyone wants to further argue, note the issue is that we’ve built a country where cars are necessary. (And yet not so necessary that someone’s license can’t be suspended!) However, there is no reason why this can’t be changed. Saying it can’t is limiting our future to also think cars are necessary. They aren’t. They are useful in many places. But you could do without them if as a society we decided to do that. Dream bigger everyone! Have a world where you DON’T need to sit in traffic every day. Where you DON’T wait at red light after red light. Where you DON’T need to be a designated driver for your friends. Where you DON’T fear the day your vision gets so bad you lose your independence. Where you DON’T need to spend hundreds on insurance and car purchases and parking tickets and everything else. If we don’t dream it, we can’t ask for it. And if we don’t ask for it, what we have now will be what we’re stuck with.
(And if you want to have a car and have fun - sure! But then it’ll be extra fun when it’s not a requirement and fewer cars are on the road!)