Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Schuetze]

I think Switzerland has one of the best gun laws in the world since it's quite lax while at the same time having certain restrictions when it comes to ownership.

People should be able to own guns as long as they don't have criminal records, that's all that is important. Shooting should be allowed freely at gun ranges and there should be no restrictions on what you can own.

That's why it works so well over here.

[Mayhem]

I'm curious, though, do you think you have a greater "right to a car" than you do to, for instance, a right to vote? A right against illegal search and seizures? Since you cite the example of convicted felons who've forfeited civil rights. If you are first and foremost defining the significance of your rights with the idea that your strongest and surest rights are only to those things that the government doesn't bother to deprive you of, you are rather missing the point of having them in the first place.

i think rights are privileges with a fancy name if the government has the legal power to deprive you of them

funny that you mention it though, as far as i´m aware natural rights can´t be forfeited, apparently they can if you´re a convicted felon

[TITAN308]

Cars that can travel past 85mph should be banned or heavily regulated.

There is absolutely zero reason to have a car in the United States that can travel faster than 85mph as that is the fastest speed limit of any road in our country.

Clearly there is no scientific evidence that shows that having a car that can travel greater than 85 mph is a benefit to society, however there are plenty of studies that show speeding (breaking the speed limit) results in thousands of deaths per year.

This is a huge health issue and we must address it.

[Spectral]

Cars that can travel past 85mph should be banned or heavily regulated.

There is absolutely zero reason to have a car in the United States that can travel faster than 85mph as that is the fastest speed limit of any road in our country.

Clearly there is no scientific evidence that shows that having a car that can travel greater than 85 mph is a benefit to society.

I wouldn't be particularly bothered by newly manufactured cars being governed at 85. Is there actually any good argument against that?

[Deleted]

I wouldn't be particularly bothered by newly manufactured cars being governed at 85. Is there actually any good argument against that?

You would have to craft exceptional hypotheticals to make an argument to the contrary I think.

Another possible one would be assuming technical limitations or higher maintainance costs without any hard data.

[Mayhem]

Cars that can travel past 85mph should be banned or heavily regulated.

There is absolutely zero reason to have a car in the United States that can travel faster than 85mph as that is the fastest speed limit of any road in our country.

Clearly there is no scientific evidence that shows that having a car that can travel greater than 85 mph is a benefit to society, however there are plenty of studies that show speeding (breaking the speed limit) results in thousands of deaths per year.

This is a huge health issue and we must address it.

why not? what are the benefits of cars that can drive faster than the speed limit? also i´d argue this will happen anyway with driverless cars, but i wouldn´t mind bringing it into action with newly manufactured cars, regulating older ones on a reasonable level if needed at all, the laws for speeding wouldn´t vanish, so i don´t see how cars that are able to go faster than 85mph should be banned or heavily regulated, an incentive for buying speed regulated cars would be reasonable though

[Kasierith]

I wouldn't be particularly bothered by newly manufactured cars being governed at 85. Is there actually any good argument against that?

Cars don't go up to a certain speed and then go from functioning perfectly to the car falling apart. It goes in degrees. At a certain speed, maneuvering is difficult. At a certain speed, the car begins vibrating. At a certain speed, things start going really wrong. If you have a car that goes up to 140, it isn't going to be running perfectly at 135, definitely not to the point of being fully safe to drive. Having cars with a maximum speed set higher gives functional breathing room so that the 65-70 range is smooth.

[Mayhem]

Cars don't go up to a certain speed and then go from functioning perfectly to the car falling apart. It goes in degrees. At a certain speed, maneuvering is difficult. At a certain speed, the car begins vibrating. At a certain speed, things start going really wrong. If you have a car that goes up to 140, it isn't going to be running perfectly at 135, definitely not to the point of being fully safe to drive. Having cars with a maximum speed set higher gives functional breathing room so that the 65-70 range is smooth.

there are regulated cars in germany or austria or both as far as i´m aware, it can be circumvented but it´s illegal, i don´t think anyone´s proposing to make cars more unreliable and less save to drive to make them more uhm save to... see? this makes no sense

[Deleted]

If you have a car that goes up to 140, it isn't going to be running perfectly at 135, definitely not to the point of being fully safe to drive. Having cars with a maximum speed set higher gives functional breathing room so that the 65-70 range is smooth.

That assumes thats a hard cap and not an artificially imposed limit.

[Schuetze]

why not? what are the benefits of cars that can drive faster than the speed limit? also i´d argue this will happen anyway with driverless cars, but i wouldn´t mind bringing it into action with newly manufactured cars, regulating older ones on a reasonable level if needed at all, the laws for speeding wouldn´t vanish, so i don´t see how cars that are able to go faster than 85mph should be banned or heavily regulated, an incentive for buying speed regulated cars would be reasonable though

Why not? This is truly the perfect example of what is wrong with people that love when the government controls everything in their daily lives. Because we have to trust people, because you can't handle people like babies for the sake of the "common good" without sacrificing your freedom to own something that goes faster than the speed limit.

You guys would have loved to live under an authoritarian dictatorship, where every step you take and every decision you "make" is controlled by the government.

I seriously will never understand this mentality of banning and restricting everything. Lets put people inside padded rooms while wearing restraining jackets for their own safety and the safety of others! /s

Also, why do you think we don't have cars like that? Because the budget of the police force in any country that enforces speed limits would be totally crushed by something like this.

The fact that you don't want to accept is that money plays a big role in this decision, why would the government want to impose something like this when they would lose money on the speeding tickets?

There's no such thing as "public safety" and "for the greater good", it's all about the money and if you lose money by imposing something then they won't certainly change anything at all. I could only imagine the money that insurance companies would lose if something like this became true!

[Rukentuts]

That assumes thats a hard cap and not an artificially imposed limit.

And such devices already exist.

This is truly the perfect example of what is wrong with people that love when the government controls everything in their daily lives.

Someone should link you the 4chan socialism post. They already do.

You guys would have loved to live under an authoritarian dictatorship, where every step you take and every decision you "make" is controlled by the government.

By enforcing laws that already exist? o.o

This is slippery slope on steroids.

[Kasierith]

That assumes thats a hard cap and not an artificially imposed limit.

Well, yes. Industry standard, if I remember correctly, is to express the hard cap on a car's speed.

Another thing to remember: speed limits apply to public roadways. The fastest car in the world is 270 mph, done on a private course. The process of differentiating which cars are "sports" or for these kinds of use from your standard minivan, and thus differentiating which should be governed at being capped at 85, is far too subjective to be put down in law.

[cuafpr]

I wouldn't be particularly bothered by newly manufactured cars being governed at 85. Is there actually any good argument against that?

fun, racing, testing, on private roads / tracks, emergencies, custom tuning etc...

[Stormdash]

i think rights are privileges with a fancy name if the government has the legal power to deprive you of them

funny that you mention it though, as far as i´m aware natural rights can´t be forfeited, apparently they can if you´re a convicted felon

Where does government get its power? From its own inherent glory?

[Mayhem]

Why not? This is truly the perfect example of what is wrong with people that love when the government controls everything in their daily lives. Because we have to trust people, because you can't handle people like babies for the sake of the "common good" without sacrificing your freedom to own something that goes faster than the speed limit.

You guys would have loved to live under an authoritarian dictatorship, where every step you take and every decision you "make" is controlled by the government.

I seriously will never understand this mentality of banning and restricting everything. Lets put people inside padded rooms while wearing restraining jackets for their own safety and the safety of others! /s

Also, why do you think we don't have cars like that? Because the budget of the police force in any country that enforces speed limits would be totally crushed by something like this.

The fact that you don't want to accept is that money plays a big role in this decision, why would the government want to impose something like this when they would lose money on the speeding tickets?

There's no such thing as "public safety" and "for the greater good", it's all about the money and if you lose money by imposing something then they won't certainly change anything at all. I could only imagine the money that insurance companies would lose if something like this became true!

i´m now for 10 years scraping bodies off streets because of their freedom or the freedom of others, some aspects of life need to be regulated because the majority of people lack the mental capacity to understand what harm cars can do

if you aren´t one of them, good for you, but guess what, there are a lot of them out on the street, so freedom to own something you aren´t allowed to drive that fast anyway isn´t a compelling argument in my mind

i do like the tinfoil hattery that´s going on though

[Schuetze]

And such devices already exist.
Someone should link you the 4chan socialism post. They already do.
By enforcing laws that already exist? o.o

This is slippery slope on steroids.

Enforcing laws have nothing to do with restricting the freedom to choose what you want to buy. As far as I know I still live in a somewhat capitalistic society that lets me choose the car that I want to own, if you have problems with that perhaps you should move to North Korea.

Enforcing and making laws is not a problem for me, since I respect the speed limit. But under no circumstance would I like to live in a country that would restrict my freedom to own a 1000 Horse Power car because of the thought that I could break the speed limit (which only shows that the said country doesn't trust you with your decisions).

[Mayhem]

Where does government get its power? From its own inherent glory?

is this a "we the people" road you´re trying to go?

[Rukentuts]

Enforcing laws have nothing to do with restricting the freedom to choose what you want to buy.

It does when laws that govern speed can be designed to be enforced from the vehicle itself.

- - - Updated - - -

Enforcing and making laws is not a problem for me, since I respect the speed limit. But under no circumstance would I like to live in a country that would restrict my freedom to own a 1000 Horse Power car because of the thought that I could break the speed limit (which only shows that the said country doesn't trust you with your decisions).

Horsepower is irrelevant to an artificial top speed.

[Mayhem]

Well, yes. Industry standard, if I remember correctly, is to express the hard cap on a car's speed.

Another thing to remember: speed limits apply to public roadways. The fastest car in the world is 270 mph, done on a private course. The process of differentiating which cars are "sports" or for these kinds of use from your standard minivan, and thus differentiating which should be governed at being capped at 85, is far too subjective to be put down in law.

i don´t get it, what has this to do with cars on private courses?

formula one cars aren´t street legal, you don´t even need a driving license to operate them, still they seem to be manufactured

[TITAN308]

Schuetze incase you missed it, people like Rukennuts think life should imitate this:



You haven't committed a crime yet. However you might. So we need to get rid of anything you might use to possibly maybe commit a crime.