Powered by The New York Times‘ endless war on gun rights, auto writer (and lawyer!) Jamie Kitman [above] posted a polemic called Guns and Their Users Should Be Regulated Like Cars and Drivers Are. If you think the headline’s a bit awkward — not to mention Germanic and Yoda-like — try reading Mr. Kitman’s convoluted argument to license guns like cars. It goes a little something like this:
Courts may hold that driving is a privilege not a right, but it is a privilege so completely and readily granted that the freedom to own and operate an automobile is better described as a supra-right, more fundamental than many. The automobile and gasoline lobbies, which have made the case for easy car ownership and agreeable national policy through the years, dwarf the power and financial influence of the N.R.A. And yet cars and their fuel have been regulated.
As a car writer, surely Mr. Kitman meant to say driving’s a Supra right. Which makes just about as much sense as his attempt to redefine a privilege (driving) as a right more fundamental than many. The right to feel safe? The right to a cell phone? Anyway, far be it for me to fisk Mr. Kitman’s ideas about automotive and firearms equivalency when a commentator named Dave wrote what could be — should be? — the last word on the subject. Setting aside the whole natural, civil and Constitutional right misegos.
Don’t pull this nonsense over people’s’ eyes about how we should regulate guns like cars, because frankly, guns are already more regulated than cars.
I have to undergo a background check in almost all cases when I buy a gun. Do you have to when you buy a car?
There are wait periods for buying guns in most states. Do you have one when buying a car?
You have to be a US citizen or on a green card to buy a gun. How about a car?
Can’t legally own, possess, or purchase a gun if you’re a violent felon. How about a car?
On and on and on.
So stop it. Seriously, you’re giving attorneys a bad name.
See, now that’s funny! The bit about attorneys. Right Ralph? Johannes? Bueller?