"We require car owners to register their cars with the state. Why can't we require gun owners to register their guns with the state?"
One of the biggest arguments I hear for gun control include the following statements:
These types of questions are used to equate gun ownership with car ownership in an attempt to convince the average American to conclude that the right to drive a car comes with certain requirements and responsibilities. And if we already require these "common sense" measures for drivers, why can't we get on board with the idea that these requirements should also work with gun ownership? After all, these ideas seem pretty logical, don't they?
Logical, until you actually apply all the same laws and statutes to gun ownership that we do for vehicles. In fact, if we were to regulate firearms in exactly the same way we do for cars and trucks, you'll find that these laws will actually expand gun rights in ways that are unthinkable in today's society.
So, let's begin.
*Please note, the following list is not complete. It will be updated periodically with more data points as I think of them.
In many states, people as young as 14 years old can get a drivers license. Currently, you must be 18 years old in all states to purchase a rifle or shotgun. The new regulations would allow a 14 year old to buy firearms. Win for the 2nd Amendment.
A valid drivers license from any state is recognized in all other states. Currently, California does not recognize concealed weapons permits issued in other states within California's borders. The new regulations would force all states to recognize gun carry permits issued in other states. Win for the 2nd Amendment.
Under currently state laws, a suspended or revoked drivers license, due to a misdemeanor or felony, can be restored after the person has satisfied a sentence levied by a court. Under the new gun laws, if a violent felon or domestic abuser satisfies their sentence handed down by a court, their gun licence would be restored. Win for the 2nd Amendment.
All vehicles must be registered be registered with local governments to travel on public roads. The new regulations would force gun owners to register their firearms with local governments should they decide to carry their guns outside private property. Loss for the 2nd Amendment.
However, vehicles kept and used on private property do not have to be registered with the local government. Therefore, guns that are kept within the home for use withing the home or on private property would not be required to be registered with a local government. Semi-win for the 2nd Amendment.
Vehicles driven on public roads are required to be insured. The new regulations would require firearms owners to carry insurance should they want to carry their firearms in public. Loss for the 2nd Amendment.
However, vehicles kept and used on private property do not require insurance. The new regulations would exempt firearm insurance if they are only used and carried on private property. Semi-win for the 2nd Amendment.
In most states, one can legally drive a car if their blood alcohol content is lower than .08%. Also, those with legally obtained medical marijuana cards from their state can legally drive a car as long as they are not stoned when driving. Under many current state laws, such as in Idaho, it is illegal to carry a firearm if you are intoxicated in any degree. It is also illegal to fill out a form 4473 and answer question 11-e in the negative if you are a user of medical or recreational marijuana. Under the new laws, as long as you're not over the legal limit to drive a car, you can carry your gun. Also, all users of medical and recreational marijuana may also carry a gun. Huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
Currently, if you are convicted of a misdemeanor or felony that is not drug related, your vehicle is not confiscated by the state. Under the new laws, if you are convicted of felony grand larceny, you still get to keep your gun. Win for the 2nd Amendment.
If you beat your wife up, the state won't take your car away. Under the new laws, if you beat your wife up, you keep your guns. Win for the 2nd Amendment (that's actually a bad win).
Currently, a muffler is standard equipment and is legally required on all vehicles that are driven on public roads. Currently, suppressors for firearms require a $200 federal tax stamp, an enhanced background check, must be registered with the federal government, and takes an average of 6-8 months to have transferred to you. Under the new laws, all firearms sold must also include a suppressor as standard equipment. Huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
Currently, many vehicles of all years of production can be purchased with a manual or automatic transmission. Firearms sold to the average consumer cannot be sold in a fully automatic configuration. If you want to purchase an automatic firearm, you must pass a very vigorous background check, get permission from your local law enforcement official, pay a $200 federal tax stamp, cough up tens of thousands of dollars to buy the automatic firearm, and it must be registered with the federal government. Also, you cannot purchase an automatic firearm that was manufactured after 1986. Under the new laws, however, you would be free to choose a semi-automatic or fully-automatic firearm in exactly the same way. There would be no difference in paperwork to purchase any version you want. Huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
Under current law, you can make just about any modification you want on your vehicle. In your own garage, you can chip your vehicle and install aftermarket parts to increase horsepower. If you modify your AR-15 in your garage to become fully automatic or saw off the barrel on your 12 gauge, you have committed a felony that is punishable with 10 years in federal prison. Under the new laws, you can do whatever you want with your firearms to make them more concealable, fire as an automatic, or even make your own suppressor. And you don't even have to tell the government about it. Huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
Under current state and local laws, NOBODY must undergo a criminal background check to purchase ANY vehicle for use on public or private roads. Under the new laws, you wouldn't have to undergo a criminal background check to purchase any firearm. Huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
If somebody uses a car to kill other people, the victims or families of the victims cannot sue the car manufacturer for the misuse of the products they sell. Currently, gun manufacturers cannot be sued for the misuse of their products that results in the death of others. However, if people like Hillary Clinton had their way, gun manufacturers would be held liable. For now, huge win for the 2nd Amendment.
Just so we're clear: I, Chad Russell, DO NOT support regulating guns like we regulate cars. The whole purpose of this post is to demonstrate the sheer idiocy and utter ignorance of people who would want to do so. I completely understand that gun rights are natural human rights and are protected by the 2nd Amendment. I also understand that driving a car is not protected by the U.S. Constitution.