Tuesday, November 13, 2012

If Guns Were Cars - The Mindset of Gun Free Cities


It's  a town where the majority are law abiding, wanting only to work hard and protect their families.

The speed limit  in town is 40 mph.

Unlicensed drivers, greatly exceeding the speed limit, regularly roar though the town, plowing through red lights, killing pedestrians who simply wished to go about their business unharmed.

The city's lawmakers discuss, with great outcry, the number of "innocents" killed in such traffic accidents.

They have a solution to keep the city streets safe so people can be out and about in the day, into the evening, without fear.


They lower the speed limit to 30 mph.

And take the licenses from everyone, forcing  the law abiding  drivers into becoming  pedestrians.

As more continue to die on the streets from unlicensed  reckless drivers, there is a hue and outcry from the city leaders, saying " that didn't work, people are dying - . . .

 We need to lower the speed limit even more!"

To me, keeping guns out of the hands of  law abiding citizens while the criminals regularly use them at will, knowing no one can legally fight back, makes about as much sense.

14 comments:

BobG said...

Anti-gunner logic.

RabidAlien said...

Amen. Making more restrictive gun laws, laws that criminals, by definition, are NOT going to follow anyway, makes absolutely no sense in curbing violence.

Eric said...

Then you only allow taxis, as only taxi drivers should have licenses.

Stephen said...

Personally, from up here in the choir, I enjoy being preached to. :-)

Stephen said...

Personally, from up here in the choir, I enjoy being preached to. :-)

RichD said...

Extremely well put. Unfortunately, the message is lost in places like Chicago. They don't seem to have the sense to be able to look at places like Mexico where guns are against the law and only the cartels have any. Or England during the riots where mobs ruled,citizens were helpless and the police were outnumbered. I still say any politician that stands for gun control should be stripped of his or her right to bear arms as well as any form of bodyguards. What is good for the minions should be good for the politicians.

Don said...

Got it in one!

Don said...

Got it in one!

Blue said...

Excellent analogy, B. :)

Mick said...

Brigid, I'm going to be sorely tempted to swipe that after some paraphrasing as it so succintly places the argument close to home. The Rush Limbaugh principle (not original) of illustrating absurdity by being equally absurd, and drawing that to the next conclusion. I, too, enjoy being preached to; it gives me cause to pause and reflect on the bigger picture. Thanks, as always!

crankyjohn said...

Although, I am sure there are sincere and naive people who believe gun control is needed to save lives and cut down on violence, the truth is, there are many people who want to do away with the 2A because they know, its not just for hunting, and home self defense, it was meant as a deterrent to tyrannical government. Kind of like the way it is heading now.

OldAFSarge said...

Brilliant analogy. I'm sure most, if not all, of your readers get it. Those "out there" who don't? I don't think they'll ever get it. But still I pray.

jerrychicken said...

If I may offer a polar opposite view and without presuming at all to preach or even comprehend your own situations and lifestyle, the situation here in the UK is, as one commenter pointed out, that gun ownership is illegal for all but those who hold licences and getting to hold a licence is virtually impossible (although not totally impossible).

If you belong to a gun club or you are a farmer then you'll probably get a gun licence, if you are just an ordinary citizen who wants one for "protection" then you will not, indeed if you are in a gun club AND a farmer AND mention that you also want it for protection then you'll be refused.

"RichD" asks what happened to "ordinary citizens" during the riots in Aug '11, well, most of the rioters were not armed, I know of a couple of police forces who reported having shots fired and the initial riot kicked off after police made a stop and search for a suspected illegal firearm, but nearly all of those rioting were not armed with guns.

The view here is that the police do not want to be armed (surveys repeatedly show that) and as we have more cctv coverage than almost any other civilised country it was actually a much less dangerous task to easily identify and arrest thousands of rioters after the event rather than have a shoot out on Main Street.

Would I want to shoot an intruder in my house ?

No, seriously I wouldn't and yes, I have been in that situation so I know what it feels like.

Its a different idealogy, it works for us, I'm not saying it would for you.

Windy Wilson said...

What if there were a crime wave of rapes? What would Sara Brady and others of that ilk recommend if they recommended the same techniques and policies for firearms?