Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: If anti-gunners made vehicle safety laws.....

  1. #1
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    Based on the well thought out, makes-perfect-sense-to-liberals, my-opinion-is better-than-your-fact, assault weapons ban, the new formed democratic government has proposed an assault vehicular ban. It goes as follows:


    1. No vehicles shall be manufactured or sold with an automatic transmission – there is no need for the automobile to perform a task for the driver which the driver is fully capable of doing himself.

    2. Gas tanks shall not exceed 10 gallons – this is plenty of gas to get to and from work in a single day.

    3. All past, present, and future vehicles shall have a governor installed to limit the speed limit to 65mph - since most people live in urban areas and do not need to drive even this fast. Rural folk will just have to deal with the inconvenience of higher speed limits in their states.

    4. You can only buy one car a month and no more than 10 gals. of gas at any given time. Again, rural folk will have to adjust their lifestyle accordingly.

    5. Storage of extra gasoline is prohibited – there is no need for extra gas which could be used for illicit purposes.

    6. All gasoline will be chemically tagged so it can be traced back to the manufacturer – in this regard, should you ever get in a car accident you can sue the gasoline manufacturer for your mishap.

    7. All alcohol will be chemically tagged so if you ever get caught drinking and driving, you can sue the brewer, distiller, or winemaker for your troubles.

    8. Manufacturers of beer, spirits, or wine must include government registered chemical tags as part of the process. After 200 pages of forms, 12 background checks, an undisclosed waiting period, and personal interview by a G-man, individuals and companies may be eligible for these tags – at the government’s discretion of course.

    9. All vehicles will be equipped with a GPS satellite transceiver with the driver’s personal information encoded into the signal. The GPS signal shall always remain in good working order and any information collected by the government by signal could be used against the driver at any time.

    10. Unless on a legal highway and or city street designed for the type of vehicle you are driving, the keys for the vehicle and the vehicle itself may never be within 100’ of each other. Keys not being used, shall be kept under, you guessed it, lock and key at all times.

    11. Municipalities may at any time, designate parts of their jurisdiction as “vehicular free.” These areas are meant to protect innocent citizens from vehicular accidents and collisions. Citizens who work in theses areas will just have to walk.

    12. The ability to purchase a vehicular is at the discretion of the local sheriff, who based on his mood, your financial donations to the sheriff department, your local personal political clout, blood type, fingerprint analysis, retina scan, need for work, and ability to complete a yes/no form without forgetting to completely spell out the state you live in, may elect to provide another form which may be completed along with a $200 tax which may be turned in for a 1-day probationary vehicle license after waiting three hours in line at the local DMV. The vehicular license may be used to purchase only the vehicles outlined on the vehicular license – assuming the registered vehicular dealer has them in stock.

    12. Any vehicle that looks like it might be breaking one of the aforementioned laws is also illegal.

    13. No one shall lawfully drive a black vehicle. These vehicles are reserved for government, police and military.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    You friggin' idiot!!! Don't be giving them any ideas!!!



  3. #3
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    You forgot that military style Jeeps, HUMVEE's, and any other vehicle purchased under government contract for the military is obviously a military vehicle designed for the battlefield. Civilians have no such business owning such vehicles, as there is no sporting purpose for them.

    Vehicles such as the H2 and H3 are too close in appearance to the original HUMVEE and should also be banned. Likewise the Jeep Wranger (all CJ, YJ, TJ, and JK models) all look too similar to the original Bantams Fords and Willys to be allowed for civilian use.

    The use of sound suppressors or "silencers" for automobiles is covered under Title 2 of the NVA (National Vehicles Act) and requires a special FBMV (Federal Bureau of Motor Vehicles, under the DoT) Form 4 to own. Owning a vehicle with a sound suppressor without the proper FBMV Form 4 is a Felony.

    After all, anyone actually putting a "silencer" on their car is only doing so for nefarious criminal purposes.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,000

    Post imported post

    You want to have fun with reporters... show them what would happen to the 1st Amendment if the same anti-gun rules were applied to it.

    Talk about getting them spun up.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    would putting my vehicle in a garage be considered "concealment"? :shock:
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    150

    Post imported post

    9. All vehicles will be equipped with a GPS satellite transceiver with the driver’s personal information encoded into the signal. The GPS signal shall always remain in good working order and any information collected by the government by signal could be used against the driver at any time.
    Not so far off:

    Colo. Dems see car use as alternative to gas tax DENVER - Nestled in the details of a major transportation proposal this year is an idea that could revolutionize how Colorado pays for its road and bridge projects.

    The proposal, from statehouse Democrats, calls for pilot projects to study whether the state should do away with its gas tax and adopt a system in which drivers are charged based on how many miles they drive.

    "What policymakers are looking at is a sustainable revenue source that they can count on," said Jim Whitty, an Oregon Department of Transportation official who has become a guru of mileage-based fees.

    States across the country are struggling with the weakening of the gas tax as a revenue stream, due to more fuel-efficient vehicles and the political difficulty of raising taxes to keep up with inflation. Colorado is one of several states, including Florida, North Carolina and Ohio, looking at implementing a mileage-based charge on drivers. But so far no state has actually made the switch or even progressed much beyond the pilot-study phase, demonstrating just how revolutionary - and challenging - the concept is.

    For starters, it would require a whole new set of technology - still being developed - both inside cars and at other points to measure and report miles traveled. And critics raise a host of concerns, from whether such a system would adversely affect rural residents who drive more by necessity to whether the system would allow government to improperly track people's movements.

    "I think it's unworkable and unwieldy," said Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry, R-Fruita. "Who pays for the transponders? How do you track them? There are a lot of large logistical questions that overwhelm it."

    In the suddenly hot world of mileage-based fee studies, Oregon has been the clear leader. The state launched a pilot project on the idea in 2006, and this year the state's governor is pushing for lawmakers to create a long-term plan for the switch.

    Whitty said one of the chief benefits of a mileage-based system is its malleability. It can be customized to charge people more for driving at rush hour or less for driving in rural areas. It can tax Hummers at a higher rate than Priuses.

    "Because this involves computers, you could do any kind of formulas you want," Whitty said. ". . . Until there are a bunch of proposals to fight over, a lot of these criticisms are premature."

    Colorado state Rep. Joe Rice, D-Littleton, one of the architects of the Democratic transportation proposal known as FASTER, said a mileage-based charge also would be better than the gas tax in another way: It creates a clearer link between how much people use the state's transportation system and how much they pay.

    Rice acknowledged that implementing such a complex system would take plenty of time and study. But he said that effort is worth it to find a more sustainable way to put transportation dollars into the state's coffers.

    "We've got to figure out something besides the gas tax," Rice said. "In my view, we're not going to get to it in five years or 10 years. But I think we've got to start."

    A report released late last year by the Brookings Institution might give lawmakers pause. The report found that the number of vehicle miles traveled nationwide has fallen. In Colorado, the 7.1 percent drop since 2006 was the third-highest in the nation.

    Robert Puentes, the study's author, attributed the drop to greater use of public transportation. Mileage fees, Puentes said, "should be part and parcel of conversations around the future of transportation in this country. But if we're looking at this as a one-to-one substitute for the gas tax, we're kidding ourselves."

    Rice and others working on the transportation proposal say they only want to empower communities to think boldly about how to fund transportation.

    "Whether using Oregon as a model or not," state Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, said, "I think we should really be exploring alternative transportation funding mechanisms."

    (Copyright KUSA*TV/Denver Post, All Rights Reserved)

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Hey Dom, there's a cure for those alternative tax ideas. Vote the Damned Dems out of office. Problem solved.

  8. #8
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    bugly wrote:
    would putting my vehicle in a garage be considered "concealment"? :shock:
    Yes, you'll need a special permit for that. The permit is only valid in your state of residence and is not a shall-issue permit. Reciprocity with other states is spotty at best and downright confusing most of the time.

    Parking garages are now elite-parking zones for people with connections to CLEOs.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Frighteningly possible. If not done in the name of sham global warming/climate change it will be done in the name of infrastructure and economic stimulus. They may not be able to get away with sticking tracking chips in our bodies yet, but they might not be too far from doing it to most all vehicles. Adding taxes to that is just adding insult to injury.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    Hey Dom, there's a cure for those alternative tax ideas. Vote the Damned Dems out of office. Problem solved.
    It should be even more widespread than that, how about just kick every "career politician" out, those are the guys that a f-ing up this great nation of ours. You know which ones they are, the ones who's families have been in politics forever. These "people" have never worked an honest day in their lives at a job that doesn't guarantee them anything in return. Make 'em get real jobs before ever running for office, that way, they know the consequences of their policy-making.
    Personally, I think there should be term limits on ALL public officials, maybe that would make them remember that they are SERVANTS of the public, and the public is their MASTER.
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    492

    Post imported post

    so, does that mean that a black vehicle is an assault vehicle?

  12. #12
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    Many of these 'hypotheticals' are already in place in the trucking industry!
    Most of the major trucking companies have 65mph governors and gps tracking systems. Most metropolitan areas have restrictions on where trucks can go, what routes they can take through/around the municipality, even what lane they can be in on the highway! There are groups that have been trying to get speed limiters to be REQUIRED by law on ALL trucks. Also, there are groups trying to get 'black boxes' that track all activities of the truck (including route traveled, travel time, and times of start/stop) to be REQUIRED by law on ALL commercial vehicles. They want DOT officers to be able to 'read' the 'box' at any time during a stop (either roadside or scale, etc.)
    This has not yet happened as there are obviously major opponents (like ALL the truck drivers) to this, as well as a lack of infrastructure, but the point is, that it COULD happen and if it happens to trucks, civilian vehicles aren't too far behind!

  13. #13
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    6L6GC wrote:
    so, does that mean that a black vehicle is an assault vehicle?
    Of course. Which brings us to forward mounted winches, engine shrouds, and collapsable tops.

    These things are military features and they have no business existing in the civilian motor pool.



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    Oh, and don't forget... If you modify your vehicle to run on any fuel other than what is available to the general public, you will be charged with tampering with propellants.

    OS alittle, isn't an airbag considered an explosive device? And isn't it required of all commercial vehicles and government owned vehicles to have a placard showing the public there are explosives onboard? And don't drivers of said vehicles have to possess a special license to carry explosives? "Where's your explosives license and placard, boy?" :what:

    IDK, think i'm just tired of always having to defend MY rights and then I see someone who just happens to work for the gov doing something I would go to jail for, but he gets away with it time after time.

    Its time for the "public servants" to start doing their job properly, not restricting our lives, but making it a better place for all of us. After all, it is their job...
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  15. #15
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    shad0wfax wrote:
    6L6GC wrote:
    so, does that mean that a black vehicle is an assault vehicle?
    Of course. Which brings us to forward mounted winches, engine shrouds, and collapsable tops.

    These things are military features and they have no business existing in the civilian motor pool.

    Can't have 4WD either.... JUST FOR THE MILITARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    JoeSparky
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Upstate, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    240

    Post imported post

    That would be funny if it weren't happening.

    One may argue that no one has a "right" to drive a car since it isn't in the Constitution, but I maintain that had this situation been reality then, the right would exist. Personal transportation in America is right up there with food, clothing and shelter, and always has been. Our forefathers just saw boats and horses as a part of the norm, and didn't realize that their country would ever become this irrational.

    It *used* to be a joke that we would be taxed for the air that we breath. Thanks to the "Global Warming" bandwagon and it's "CO2 offsets", we are now literally living that joke.

    Is this really the country our ancestors sacrificed so much and fought so hard to form for us?

    I'm a conservative, and also a good steward of the earth, as most conservatives are. I have no idea how we've gained this bad rap, and I'm gravely offended at the personal penalties assessed on me in my life here.

    For real, something needs to be done about all of this. This is beyond ridiculous.

    I've written every representative regularly, voted informed, and participated in every petition and poll I've come across. It doesn't seem to be getting me anywhere. What more can I do?


  17. #17
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    Pamiam wrote:
    That would be funny if it weren't happening.

    One may argue that no one has a "right" to drive a car since it isn't in the Constitution, but I maintain that had this situation been reality then, the right would exist. Personal transportation in America is right up there with food, clothing and shelter, and always has been. Our forefathers just saw boats and horses as a part of the norm, and didn't realize that their country would ever become this irrational.

    It *used* to be a joke that we would be taxed for the air that we breath. Thanks to the "Global Warming" bandwagon and it's "CO2 offsets", we are now literally living that joke.

    Is this really the country our ancestors sacrificed so much and fought so hard to form for us?

    I'm a conservative, and also a good steward of the earth, as most conservatives are. I have no idea how we've gained this bad rap, and I'm gravely offended at the personal penalties assessed on me in my life here.

    For real, something needs to be done about all of this. This is beyond ridiculous.

    I've written every representative regularly, voted informed, and participated in every petition and poll I've come across. It doesn't seem to be getting me anywhere. What more can I do?
    Only what the rest of us can do... Our best and endure to the end!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •