Home
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
I keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
New cars will only be purchased from Federal Automobile Licensees who must provide fingerprints, proof of character, secure storage for all vehicles, and who must call the Federal Bureau of Motor Vehicles to verify your information before purchase. They may approve or decline or delay the sale. If they decline, you may appeal the decision in writing to a review board. If they delay, it becomes an approval automatically after 10 days. However, the dealer may decline to complete such a sale in case of later problems.
Additionally, the purchase of more than two cars in a given year will require signing an understanding that buying cars in order to resell them without a license is a crime. There is an 11% federal excise tax on all new vehicles, plus any state or local tax.
Federal Automobile Licensees must agree to submit to 24/7/365, unannounced, unscheduled searches of their entire homes, businesses and any relates properties and personal effects to be named later.
Then you will be eligible to take your drivers' license test to determine your eligibility to operate on the street. Rules will vary by state, with some states requiring proof of need to own a vehicle for business purposes, and up to 40 hours of professional education. Also, not all states will accept all licenses. You will need to keep track of this information. Additionally, speed limits will not be posted. It is your responsibility to research the driving laws in each area you wish to travel through. Some communities may not allow out of state vehicles, sports cars, or even any vehicles at all. Violation of these laws will result in confiscation and destruction of your vehicle by crushing.
To have a turbocharger, supercharger (External Engine Compression Devices) or a muffler will require an application to the Federal Bureau of Motor Vehicles. A $2000 tax stamp will be required for these High Performance Vehicles. Your request must also be signed by the local chief law enforcement officer, and you must provide fingerprints. If approved in 10-16 weeks, you will be responsible for keeping your High Performance Vehicle in secure storage, and request permission in writing to take it out of state. You will need to carry this documentation with you. There are 13 states that do not allow possession of High Performance Vehicles. Be sure you are aware of those laws before planning your trips. (But really, what do you need such a vehicle for anyway? Who really needs to drive that fast? You must willingly accept and adhere to the socially accepted idea that you are inherently evil for merely possessing such a fast, high powered automobile.)
Additionally, superchargers and turbochargers must be manufactured before June 1, 1986. They may be sold and refitted by a FAL who also has a Special Occupational Tax license authorizing him to work on these. New superchargers, however, are a violation of federal law, except for use by the police or military, or specific government contractors. Expect to pay $15-$30,000 each for these items. Mufflers will only cost from $250-$1000, plus the $2000 stamp. However, once the muffler is damaged, it must be disposed of by cutting it into three pieces. Failure to do this may result in your family going through the next decade only knowing you in a prison jumpsuit and all your bank accounts seized and never replenished.
Imported sports cars will be prohibited. You may purchase other items from foreign manufacturers, but your automobile is in a special class of prohibition due to its inherently evil and sinister nature. The frames may be imported, cut into three pieces, and reassembled with US made engines and suspensions, as long as 60% of the parts are American. Shortly, though, the Transmission Loophole will be closed. The purpose of allowing imports is for spare parts, not to build more destructive "race vehicles.” Transmissions will have to be US made.
Repairs may only be conducted by a licensed FAL, who will send a truck to retrieve your vehicle. It must be a flatbed type truck, winch/dolly trucks are not allowed, under 10/$10,000 penalty. You may work on your own vehicle, but any repair that exceeds emission or performance standards will be subject to federal criminal charges. And violation of this reasonable regulation could result in not only your imprisonment and the confiscation of your assets but imprisonment of any employee or family member who was insane enough to repair your “race car” for you.
Be aware that an existing HPV may have multiple HP Features. A new HPV will require a license for each feature you wish to add to it—one each for muffler or external engine compression device. And you must request and receive, in writing, permission from the federal, state and local governing authorities prior to making such modifications.
Converting a standard car to a sports car will require payment of a $2000 tax, even if no HP features are added. However, if an FAL/SOT does the conversion on a new frame before the vehicle leaves their premises, it will only be a $50 tax. You will need to carry this documentation in the glove box at all times, the mere failure of which alone can result in an arrest and possible conviction.
There is discussion of closing the Car Dealer Loophole, through which private individuals sell cars to friends without going through an FAL. It is important we have these background checks. Surveys show criminals prefer to buy unlicensed to get around their legal liabilities so they can commit crimes in stolen vehicles, which evidence has proven for many years to be true.
Some vehicle law convictions will result in loss of your driving privileges forever. This includes reckless operation, drunk driving, an incorrect bumper height or attachment, or the wrong type of exhaust. Collisions may also result in permanent loss of driving, if injury occurs and negligence is proven. In addition, any felony conviction of any kind--even tax evasion--will mean permanent loss of your driving privileges. In these cases, it will even be illegal to ride or sit in a friend's car.
There is also discussion of prohibiting brightly colored vehicles. Vehicles are transportation, not toys, and should not be marketed in a way that suggests they are intended for casual use. It is important that everyone be aware of the dangerous nature of cars.
In the future, we may have to consider large displacement engines (anything over 2.5 liters) and transmissions with more than three speeds as being High Performance Items to be added to the federal registry. There will be a window during which you can register your items for $2000 each, provided you meet the background check. Otherwise, you will have to immediately surrender them to an FAL/SOT to dispose of on your behalf. Operating an unlicensed HPV after this date will result in confiscation and destruction of the vehicle, and the 10/$10,000 punishment.
These laws and regulations are due to drunk drivers, reckless drivers and other criminals. The automobile community should be glad it is allowed to exist at all, given all the deaths and environmental damage caused by these vehicles.
The president said today that he strongly supports your right to own and drive basic, standard vehicles for farm use and carpooling. But he and many other people have made it clear that eventually – maybe this month – we need to cease all manufacturing of such high powered automobiles for the civilian market.
Eventually, we need to move away from the notion that owning and operating a vehicle is a right and entitlement, and limit it to people with a proven, bona fide professional need. There are plenty of trains and buses for normal people. This is how most civilized nations are moving and is not a violation of your right to travel.
©2013 by Michael Z. Williamson www.MichaelZWilliamson.com
Permission to share granted for non profit purposes as long as this notice is included.
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
Cars are involved in 50% more deaths than guns. About 1/3 of car fatalities involve a driver under age 21. Most lethal car accidents involve multiple casualties. If it's unreasonable to allow someone under 21 to handle a handgun, it is positively insane to allow them behind the wheel of a car, with 6 million times the potential energy, where a SINGLE error or act of will can kill dozens.
No reasonable person can object to raising the driving age to 21, and improving our background checks--no one with a history of mental illness or psychotropic drug use should ever be allowed to drive a car. Likewise, anyone with a history of anger-related violence is a threat to those around them.
Ultimately, we need to ask the hard question: Who really NEEDS a car? Certainly urbanites with access to mass transit have no need for a personal vehicle, given the inherent dangers and cost to society.
The fallacious response to this is to argue that "cars aren't meant to kill." But, if they are not meant to, but are 50% more lethal than handguns, no reasonable person can argue against tighter restrictions.
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
My point about the "Second Amendment isn't absolute, of course it doesn't apply to nukes" argument is it's a straw man, that's always presented for reductio ad absurdum, and a slippery slope.
"Of course no one would defend the right to own a nuke," but then the next statement, always implied and usually stated is, "So since the right is not absolute, let's see how far we can shove it up your ass and claim 'reasonable.'"  To such people, nukes are not "reasonable" and neither are tanks and planes and artillery and machine guns and "Deadly semiautomatic weapons of mass destruction killing machines that rapidly and accurately spray fire from the hip and can kill 30 kids in a matter of seconds from a high capacity clip."
No facts, just bullshit, dishonest soundbites and attempts to blame close to 100 million honest people for the actions of less than 10, and to compare the ability to wipe out cities to the ability to defend one's home.
Yes, and we also need to do something about the Jewish Bankers who own the media and finance and governments, yadda yadda.  After all, they killed Jesus.
And don't forget that because of liberals, illegal aliens cross our southern border every night to unplug our comatose women.
Oh, and all liberals want to send everyone to gulags, and all free speech activists endorse child porn.
And most blacks are drug dealers and hookers.
So, yes.  I have a right to own a nuke.  While you jabber in mock fear over the unlikelihood of that ever happening, keep in mind that a rifle, or even a machine gun, isn't a millionth of a nuke.  Trying to play that card just makes you look like a panicky idiot.
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
I need to keep mentioning this because it's important: If you aren't well-trained in a subject, it's dangerous and foolish to try to legislate it. Consider all the internet "equality" and "freedom" and "safety" acts to come out of Congress.
One of the items during so-called "Assault Weapon Ban," is being bandied about for renewal—a ban on "high capacity clips," by which the proponents mean a ban on standard capacity magazines that they don’t like—because 30 round has been standard for AK rifles for 65 years and for AR rifles for 45 years, for example.
Here's the problems:
The military regards magazines as expendable. It's desirable to hang onto them and bring them back, but in combat, or even a field exercise, it's expected that some will get dropped and lost. During an engagement, one should be shooting, communicating, moving and reloading. "Remembering to secure your partial or empty magazine and stow it back in a pouch somewhere" is a dangerous pain in the ass.
But of course, while there was a civilian ban on new mags in effect, they had to be controlled items, and completely accounted for. So this law did, in fact, hinder military combat readiness.
Of course, billions of existing magazines were grandfathered and in existence. So new standard magazines had to be marked with a date and "military and police" or similar nomenclature. And so did guns during that time.
Here's the wrench in the works: When the ban went away, millions of mags could be and were surplus sold, as were millions of guns. All of them marked "military/LE use only," but perfectly legal for civilians.
So, if there's a new round of restrictions, there will have to be a new round of dates stamped on things, and a new round of "ILLEGAL" markings. In the meantime, some states still have restrictions and their own markings. Which means there will be an entire catalog of markings to determine what is legal and what isn't.
So, you can expect lots of stuff to slip through the cracks, and lots of people to get falsely accused/detained/arrested/have their property confiscated due to misreading of marks. It's also entirely possible most cops will just say, "Fuck it" and not bother, especially as one pretty much has to have the magazine in hand to read the marks.
And of course, once again, the military will be required to account for an expendable item as a controlled item, which means troops will be learning to retain their mags rather than engage the enemy.
Given the billions of grandfathered mags, and the millions more being sold every day right now, in case there is such a restriction, it will have no effect whatsoever on crime.
BTW, I said in 1994 that the ban would have no effect, and I was right. When it expired in 2004, and there were screams of "Blood will run in the streets!" I said nothing would happen, and I was right.
Why did it even exist in the first place?
Charles Krauthammer was at least honest: "The claim of the [ban's] advocates that banning these 19 types of 'assault weapons' will reduce the crime rate is laughable," he wrote. "Nonetheless, it is a good idea, though for reasons its proponents daren't enunciate. . . . Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquillity (sic) of the kind enjoyed in sister democracies like Canada and Britain. Given the frontier history and individualist ideology of the United States, however, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically. It will probably take one, maybe two generations. It might be 50 years before the United States gets to where Britain is today. Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic -- purely symbolic -- move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation. . . . The real steps, like the banning of handguns, will never occur unless this one is taken first. . . .Yes, in the end America must follow the way of other democracies and disarm. . . . The passionate resistance to even the phony gun control of the assault weapons ban shows how far we have to go."
The purpose is to define an acceptable level of control over a civil right.
I decline.
Page 88 of 126
