In article <1qpavfINN2jp@clem.handheld.com> jmd@cube.handheld.com (Jim De Arras) writes: :In article <0096B294.AAD9C1E0@uinpla.npl.uiuc.edu> reimer@uinpla.npl.uiuc.edu   :(Paul E. Reimer) writes: :> In article <1qkftjINNoij@cronkite.cisco.com>, pitargue@cisco.com (Marciano   :Pitargue) writes: :>  :> [stuff deleted about causes of people in ER] :>  :> >due to automobile accidents and automobile crimes.  maybe we should outlaw :> >cars. :> There are a lot of automobile accidents, but atleast there is some :> regulation to try to combat this.   : :Such as?  Drunk drivers get back on the road in no time, to kill again.  Seems   :the driver's license process does not work for this. : I can testify to this. My cousin spent a few weeks in the hospital, and his friend was killed, because of a drunk driver.  The son-of-a-b**** is back on  the streets... Officers from the scene are still p***ed about that one.  :> to take a drivers safety class.   : :Because you wanted one while you were underage. : :> I HAVE to be licensed to drive.   : :Only on public roads. : :> My car :> MUST be registered.   : :Only if it is to be driven on public roads, other than between segments of my   :property. : :> I MUST (at least where I live) have liability :> insurance on both myself driving and my car (if someone else had an :> accident with it).   : :Only on public roads. And this obviously doesn't always work, else why would they offer uninsured  motorist coverage? : :> Hmm, wouldn't manditory saftey classes, registration :> of both the owner and gun, and manditory liability insurance be nice for :> gun owners. I object to mandatory registration because I don't trust my government not to use any information I give them for their own purposes.  I am licensed to carry a concealed pistol in my home state, but they never asked whether I  actually owned a firearm.  A safety class before issuing a permit to carry is reasonably, provided such classes are regularly available to the public.  Of course, most places would consider my time in the reserves and on a competition rifle team to count.   : :Perhaps, if it gave them permission to shoot in public roads and parks. :-) Hey, now that's an idea :) : :> Paul Reimer : :Jim  Now, unless you have an agenda against private ownership of firearms, why would you want to harass the person trying to legally defend themselves or exercise  their rights? (I know, defending oneself/family/whoever IS a right... at least as far as my 9mm and I are concerned... ) (Also as far as the State of Alabama seems to be concerned)  Why don't you push for stricter prosecution of those who use firearms in the commission of a crime?  I've already pointed out how we aren't nailing DUI's hard enough...  Comparing the US with other countries seldom works, but the European attitude towards alchohol and DUI seems to work.. Their attitude towards weapons isn't really a valid comparison because they've historically done their best to keep the populace disarmed and submissive, while our country was founded by a bunch of rugged individualists who told the European monarchies (for the most part) to take a flying leap (used more polite language though).  We even weaseled out of our first international treaty, and then convinced the French that it was in their best interests not to complain.. But first we had to overcome the fact that the Brits were doing their best to  restrict us to squirrel guns and such, so we'd be properly submissive while they forced us to pay for their wars.  Of course, most American history classes these days tend to gloss over facts that do not fit the image they wish to  convey... I'm glad my Amer. Hist. teacher was a Libertarian who had us review a good portion of the Federalist Papers, and debate their origins and meanings.  enough rambling,  James