Can anyone make a coherent argument that guns are LESS dangerous than cars? i doubt it...

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

76. Sorry but I have yet to see a convincing argument that the comparison is foolish

Both cars and guns are inherently hazardous by design. The safe operation of either depends on the safe performance of the operator. Both sets of devices and operators should be regulated. Old cars still on the road have at one time complied with the will of the people in being safe and meeting legislated standards. You are incorrect when you state that they have been deemed unsafe. Cars that are homemade or made in foreign countries that are not safe for their drivers or others on the road and that have never met U.S. safety standards cannot be imported, or if they are imported they must be inspected and made to comply. There are a lot of small, highly gas efficient vehicles made in the Far East such as the popular teeny tiny mini vans in China made by Daihatsu that can't be driven on America's roads because they are deemed unsafe by our legislators. It would probably cost a fortune to convert those little cars to import them and drive them but it could be done. My cousin has a gun collection that includes fully automatic weapons of a certain vintage. I'm not a gun owner and I was only half paying attention when he described how he acquired them legally, but apparently there are special permits involved and guns made before a certain date can still be owned. I think it also depends on the State.

Of course guns and cars are different devices and have different uses. I think we can agree on that. But both should be regulated as they are dangerous as well as their operators. Of course the regulations should be nuanced to fit the different nature of these hazardous devices. Your old truck apparently isn't being driven where there are people but if you do drive it on a street the law should intervene. That itself (limiting where you can use it) is itself a regulation.