Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofthedemo
Not exactly, a car that's capable of doing over 65 mph isn't just for getting from point A to point B, and a car that's capable of doing over 150 mph is certainly not just a tool for transportation, if you use that car on the open road and speed, you are directly a contributing high risk factor to the 40,000 car crash fatality victims per year in the USA.
So to reduce the 40,000 traffic fatalities each year would it really be absurd to mandate that all cars are electronically governed to reach a maximum speed of 65 mph? This would surely drastically reduce the number of traffic fatalities and increase public safety.
|
Nice try, but the analogy fails because the difference is one of
intent. People drive faster than 65 mph because they want to get to point A to point B faster, not because they want to kill someone. The fact that traffic fatalities happen at higher speeds is an unintentional consequence. Hence, most, if not all, high-speed traffic fatalities are due to recklessness and gross negligence, not intent or willfulness (and the law makes a distinction).
While many gun-related deaths are due to accident, a not insignificant portion are the result of an intent to kill ... because that's what guns were designed for.
Plus, your statistic of 40,000 traffic fatalities is misleading. Compare (the number of traffic fatalities / hours spent driving) vs. (the number of civilian gun-related deaths / civilian hours spent firing guns), then get back to us with a meaningful statistic.