« Lumbee Indians vs KKK | Main | Suicidal camels as weapon »
We need to regulate cars as tightly as we regulate guns
The Charlotte Observer has a story regarding Mohammed Taheri-Aza, the guy who drove a car into the crowd of students in order to protest beliefs that Moslems are violent. (Yeah, he sure did a job of proving his point....)
He left a note: "I would instead use a handgun to murder the citizens and residents of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, but the process of receiving a permit for a handgun in this city is highly restricted and out of my reach at present, most likely due to my foreign nationality,"
(Hat tip to Dan Gifford).
I suppose a good start for regulating cars as tightly as guns would be to require background checks for drivers' licenses, bar licenses for felons, domestic violence misdemeanants, mental committments, etc., forbid auto ownership by anyone in those classes, require paperwork to be kept by the dealer, subject to federal inspection, make any violation a felony, etc.
Oh, and ban any autos (other than police) capable of exceeding the speed limit, with states free to go beyond this and impose waiting periods, special licensing requirements, proof of need, etc.
Then we can crack down on the "private sales" loophole...
6 Comments | Leave a comment
Of course, one could point out that the laws worked in this case. He was restricted from obtaining a gun and instead was forced to use a less effective weapon. As a result, he failed in his goal of killing people, causing injuries where he could have caused death. Just saying.
Ah, yes, the famous At least he was forced to use a less-lethal weapon excuse. A car, when used to attack people is a lethal weapon.
The understanding that needs to be gained from this is not that "the laws worked", it's that criminals will always find a way to harm people. What do you think he would have used if he couldn't get the car? A hammer? A Knife? A baseball bat? This guy just wanted to hurt people. He took a tool and turned it into a weapon. Period.
Of course, one could point out that the laws worked in this case. He was restricted from obtaining a gun and instead was forced to use a less effective weapon. As a result, he failed in his goal of killing people, causing injuries where he could have caused death. Just saying.
Just because he didn't succeed doesn't mean a car is less lethal. It could just mean he's not a very good driver; it's just as likely that he's not a very good shot.
Couldn't get a gun?
Oh, not a legal gun, so he got a legal car.
Persnickety, ain't he. Heck, a friend of mine has told me he can get a .38 revolver for me any time, and I'm not exactly a hardened criminal (disclosure: one OUI twelve years ago, at 3AM).
If they are the religion of peace( so says Pres. Bush, our first illegal alien president) then why all the violence and mayhem???
I love that satire truly reflects life. There is something that truly scares me about automobiles. They have a tendency to kill people. Why, I have seen autos drive over citizens all by themselves. Oh the horror. Ban them.