These Students will change US gun landscape

[Buddha Dharma]

I will go with maybe, and it all depends on how they vote when they come of age to vote. The present voting generations are divided by hard political lines.

Well we've got two older generations that vote (Silent and Boomers). Two that don't really, or they go third party (Gen X and Y), and this new upcoming generation that remains to be seen. I'm excited by what I see though.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

How old do you have to be to own a car?

Age is hardly the only factor, is it?

 

[shunyadragon]

Well we've got two older generations that vote (Silent and Boomers). Two that don't really, or they go third party (Gen X and Y), and this new upcoming generation that remains to be seen. I'm excited by what I see though.

I temper my enthusiasm for a wait and see attitude. At present the voting percentage of the younger generations has been dismal, and apathy is part of the reason we are in the fix we are in. The voting percentage of the conservative right is high often 60 to 80%+, and the voting percentage of young voters (non-conservative) is 25% and lower in mid-term elections and not much higher in 4 year elections.

 

[Curious George]

Age is hardly the only factor, is it?

What laws do we have that prevent ownership of cars for any reason?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I temper my enthusiasm for a wait and see attitude. At present the voting percentage of the younger generations has been dismal, and apathy is part of the reason we are in the fix we are in. The voting percentage of the conservative right is high often 60 to 80%+, and the voting percentage of young voters (non-conservative) is 25% and lower in mid-term elections and not much higher in 4 year elections.

Yes that is all very true. I don't deny it. I am a non-conservative young voter. I'm on the front end of Gen Y tailing Gen X, so not sure I'm too young.

 

[shunyadragon]

What laws do we have that prevent ownership of cars for any reason?

Ownership is not driving privileges, which can be removed for mental illness, alcohol abuse, and of course limited by age.

 

[Curious George]

Ownership is not driving privileges, which can be removed for mental illness, alcohol abuse, and of course limited by age.

Removed on private property?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

What laws do we have that prevent ownership of cars for any reason?

We certainly have regulations on who is allowed to operate a vehicle. That's as good as, but I'll agree it's an oversight. We should have laws about who can buy cars, and I'm sure we would if more minor children decided they were going to hop behind the wheel and take daddy's truck for a spin.

 

[esmith]

Laws that do prohibit the purchasing and possession of firearms for non-military and non-law enforcement purposes.

So you don't want to change the laws governing the purchasing and possession of firearms but change the Constitution.
OK got it. Knew there were those out there that want to abolish ones rights and you have now made your objectives clear.

 

[Curious George]

We certainly have regulations on who is allowed to operate a vehicle. That's as good as, but I'll agree it's an oversight. We should have laws about who can buy cars, and I'm sure we would if more minor children decided they were going to hop behind the wheel and take daddy's truck for a spin.

It may not be "daddy's" at all. Again how old do you have to be to own a car?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

It may not be "daddy's" at all. Again how old do you have to be to own a car?

I don't see how age has anything to do with it, so I see no point in answering. If you wish to discuss this further I'm all ears, but I'm not going off-track about age. I'm not getting lured down that rabbit hole.

 

[Curious George]

I don't see how age has anything to do with it, so I see no point in answering.

We are talking about gun ownership correct? While I actually tend to agree with @ADigitalArtist (regarding the comparison being inadequate, not federal gun regulation), if we are going to compare the two let us compare them. If people are going to push for guns to be regulated "like cars" then let us talk about what that actually looks like.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I'm willing to discuss what that would actually look like, without bringing in the non-sequitur of age.

 

[Curious George]

I'm willing to discuss what that would actually look like, without bringing in the non-sequitur of age.

Lol, how is that a non sequitur? Does age not have a relationship to cars?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Because age has nothing to do with why cars should be regulated, or what form said regulations would be likely to take. This isn't my first time around the block on discussing this matter.

 

[Curious George]

Because age has nothing to do with why cars should be regulated, or what form said regulations would be likely to take. This isn't my first time around the block on discussing this matter.

Age is not regulated concerning driving on the streets or highways?

 

[tytlyf]

So you don't want to change the laws governing the purchasing and possession of firearms but change the Constitution.
OK got it. Knew there were those out there that want to abolish ones rights and you have now made your objectives clear.

The 2A wasn't in the original constitution

 

[Curious George]

The 2A wasn't in the original constitution

Largely because the rights enumerated in it were so basic the people who opposed the inclusion thought they were unnecessary. They were like: why would the federal government ever try to limit your speech or your right to bear arms....you guys are crazy. Turns out, not so much.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

If you could only do that with cars.....

They have. Cars are many times less dangerous than they were in the 1960s (for example). Safety glass was added, laminated windshields, seat belts, air bags, anti-lock brakes, center brake lights-- just a few of the safety measures forced into cars.

As a result, auto wreaks are thousands of times less deadly than they used to be-- thousands are alive today, because cars were forced to be safer.

Funny thing-- you have to own insurance--- liability insurance-- before driving one. What a silly idea *that* was, right?

 

[sayak83]

I believe you are correct that most mass shootings are with guns procured legally. (Of course, the number of people killed or injured in mass shootings every year in the US is just a drop in the bucket of annual firearm homicides and injuries in the US.)

Yes. But the current movement is about gun laws to prevent or reduce mass shootings. They are a form of domestic terrorism by deranged individuals and its shameful that they have been able to do this with legally procured guns.