Don't throw me in the briar patch!

Glenn Reynolds says:

15 KIDS AND ADULTS WERE INJURED, SOME CRITICALLY, AT A SCHOOL in Los Angeles, as a car veered into a crowd. It was a Mercedes. Will we hear calls for "car control," and explanations that "no one needs" a car with "that much power"?

I have to say, it baffles me when gun-freedom advocates invoke cars as a metaphor for guns. Consider that in order to drive, one must have passed a driver's-education class, be licensed by the state, and carry liability insurance for any damage you may cause while operating your vehicle. In addition, your car must be registered by the state and must pass an annual inspection to ensure that it is in safe driving condition. You must prove that you are licensed and insured in order to buy a car. Finally, the state can revoke your license to drive if you demonstrate that you are sufficiently irresponsible or dangerous when behind the wheel.

So, you know, if you really want guns and gun ownership to be treated in the same fashion as cars and car ownership, I can't say that the gun-control lobby will be unhappy with you.

Oh, and one last thing: You do need specialized education and a special license to operate nonstandard vehicles like motorcycles and large trucks. And I daresay that Mercedes drivers tend to pay more for liability insurance than, say, Geo drivers.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on January 31, 2002 to Legal matters | TrackBack