American Today

Lately, I think I’ve found the main reason why the comparison of driver’s licenses and gun restrictions makes no sense to me.

If I have a driver’s license, I can have pretty much any kind of vehicle I want (and can afford). While the speed limit may prohibit me from going over 70 MPH, I can still own a Bugatti Veyron capable of going over 200 MPH. I’m not allowed to drive it at 200mph (except maybe at a race track), but I’m not required to make it incapable of going that fast, and as long as I keep it under the speed limit, the law has no problems with me.

If we’re applying the same logic to guns, once I get a gun permit I should be allowed to own and wield a Dillon Aero minigun capable of firing 3000 rounds a minute; so long as I never shoot more than 10 a minute out of it (except maybe at a firing range), the law should have no problems with me.

But that’s clearly not what proponents of this argument are aiming for; the goal is evidently to prohibit me from owning that minigun at all, stating that I “don’t need it” and that it’s “inherently dangerous,” despite the fact that having no need for that extra 130 MPH and the inherent danger of flinging 1.5 tons of carbon fiber and aluminum around at Mach 0.25 begets no such response.