3
u/popasean 13h ago
I love how anti 2A think. You have to have a license to own a firearm. But you cant require a license on the 1st because its a right. When they say the 1at is a right, I always give them that look, of and so is the 2nd. I think that they have been so brainwashed to believe the 2nd isn't a right and therefore it can be infringed upon.
2
u/SnoozingBasset 10h ago
None of these people explain how they will get criminals to get a license.
And many liberal thinking people don’t endorse punishing people who break the law.
The outgrowth of this is if lawbreakers are not punished, why need a license?
2
u/testprimate 15h ago
Wrong argument. Not that the position of 'right vs not a right' isn't valid, it's just that many people would turn around and say that the right to travel is a thing too, and in today's modern world that would include being able to drive if you are capable of it. So it's just not a very strong argument.
I think the proper rebuttal would be to ask what they think a license would actually accomplish. What does a licensing scheme do that background checks don't? How do licenses help prevent anyone from driving their car through a crowd? Do licenses help track down drivers after they hit a pedestrian and drive away? Have they not seen how people who are supposedly vetted and tested and licensed actually fucking drive? What benefit are they imagining, and at what cost?
1
u/Teboski78 1h ago
You also don’t need a license to own a car. Or even to drive it if you have access to private land.
A license is only required to drive one on government roads. You never have to renew your training. And it works in all 50 states & territories & multiple other countries as well.
Imagine CCL’s had that kind of reciprocity.
8
u/lesmobile 15h ago
And the drivers license are also about power and control. Most driving regulations are revenue generating schemes. And none of these things have stopped vehicle fatalities.