NRA Demands Repeal of All Traffic Laws, Says “Laws Won’t Stop Bad Drivers”

trafic

Good guys with cars attempt to cross intersection polluted with bad guys with cars.

Washington, D.C. – The NRA’s Wayne LaPierre is on the offensive following the nation’s most recent gun tragedy. This time LaPierre is doubling down on his belief that any kind of gun law is a violation of the second amendment and a step towards a tyrannical Nazi-esque America, regardless of statistical evidence, the opinion of the NRA’s own members, his wife, the Pope, his butcher, the American people or plain old common sense.

LaPierre paints a picture that any kind of gun control will result in unarmed, helpless “good guys” being flanked by armed “bad guys.” He is ready to apply that same ironclad logic to repealing all traffic laws – age limits on licensing, registration, speed limits, manufacturing safety requirements, seat belts, child seats, traffic lights and standardized signs. “People are going to break the law anyway so we can no longer bother with laws that just impede the right-away right of way for good guys. These restrictive traffic laws, even those designed for safety only oppress the GOOD drivers. Therefore I anticipate a 0% increase in fatalities, in fact, I think these newly liberated good drivers will help keep the bad drivers in check. Especially if they have a gun.”

Advertisements

73 responses to “NRA Demands Repeal of All Traffic Laws, Says “Laws Won’t Stop Bad Drivers”

  1. Pingback: Beep, beep, beep, NRA Demands Repeal of All Traffic Laws, Says “Laws Won’t Stop Bad Drivers” | Unchain the tree·

  2. We the people do not need automatic weapons!! For those fighting wars it makes sense. They should not be sold to the general public. When the amendment was created, now archaic, they did need for hunting and protection. It did not say in the future should be able to have automatic weapons to kill your fellow man or children. We are pandering to an evil force in our country the NRA. Please, please stop this madness!!!We have crooked politicians who are being bought. .who actually gives a damn about all of us?? Some who voted for you. We are not talking about giving up rights. The whiners don’t get it. We are not talking about cars now…not the subject. Just the madness in our country.

    Liked by 1 person

    • That’s the beauty of my rights, I don’t have to need it to have it, anyone or anything that attempts to take a right away is evil. These include my rights to life, speech, religion, and arms. Fearmongering and removal of basic human rights is not the way to go.

      On the other hand, none of those weapons were automatic, they were semi-automatic, meaning they required a trigger pull for each round spent. Fully Automatic weapons have been banned in this country and require a special permit to even own, most military grade weapons are also illegal to own in most of the US.

      Now to the next part, they didn’t know automatic weapons were going to exist, but seeing as they didn’t put muzzle loading black powder rifles as a specific right, but chose the words right itself it leads to the belief that they were aware of advances in arms.

      I agree they should remove the corrupt politicians and people who have been bought by corporations. They should also remove anyone who breaks their oath of defending the constitution by attempting to remove any of the rights we have as human beings, spelled out on that document.

      Like

      • Anyone trying to take away your perception of the second amendment is evil? Maybe just not in your best interest? I do believe the authors of the constitution may have envisioned a time when most legislative power is brokered.. We have been warned many times!!!. But i doubt they could’ve predicted the influence the corporate media would have in getting folks to believe politicians know more about climate issues than scientists, or torture is what Christ would be doing, Or more gun will magically reduce your chances of getting holes in you,
        And my altime favorite!!!…..Eliminating the tax burden on the otherwise largest contributors, while halting the only means of redistribution of the wealth (that’s being acquired and hidden by the super wealthy) and put back into circulation, By drastically reducing well paid Government jobs. Will somehow “magically” stimulate and grow a capitalistic economy that’s based on consumer spending?? .So lets elect a wealthy business man to set policies and sign new laws written by politicians who “can’t” loss their seat!! Because of “redistricting” while accusing the other party of voter fraud!!!
        ……What could go wrong?…..Not only that, But I’ve hear on the news channel, That Liberals are evil with a secret agenda to destroy the country cause they hate freedom and/or happiness!!! Sounds legit!!!

        Like

      • So, it’s okay with you to retain the right that enables Farook and Malik to buy guns and kill people? Doesn’t that make you partially responsible for their crimes???

        Like

      • Freedom of religion does not allow the practice of human sacrifice. You have freedom of speech, but you’re not allowed to yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater when there is none. Since we have been able to apply common sense rules regarding your First Amendment rights, why should the Second Amendment be exempt?

        Liked by 1 person

      • You mis-understand the spirit of the 2nd amendment. And, you have been mis-informed by the mainstream media, which generates fear to keep us controlled. Wake up my brother and join the good guys who would have your back. !!

        Like

      • Please fill me in. When did owning a weapon designe to kill as many humans as possible in as short a time as possible become a human right? When was my human right to feel safe from lunatics with deadly weapons eliminated? And finally, were you born an idiot, or do you choose to be that way?

        Like

      • Like it or not, SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd amendment applies to an INDIVIDUAL’S right to own and bear arms. This was decided on June 28, 2008 in District of Columbia V Heller.

        So, yes, I do have the RIGHT to purchase, own and bear arms, whether it be in competition, target practice or defending myself and my family.

        Like

      • It’s not the ten commandments, man, so check the melodrama. Free people should be able to change a law or a “right” as you call it when it needs to be changed. There are 90 guns for every 100 people in this country, so relax. The gun nuts are far more dangerous than the folks who want to prevent terrorists from having easy access to guns, for fyi

        Like

      • Shut your pie hole. Our families are sick of your evil families

        Like

    • Automatic weapons are not sold to the general public. But that just shows that you don’t know what your talking about. And since you claim that the 2nd amendment is now “archaic”, then I suppose all the rest are too. So since the Second Amendment was only meant to include the old muskets and flintlock rifles, then the First Amendment, stating freedom of the press, should only cover newspapers, right? I mean, back then, they didn’t have TV, radio, Post Office mail service, telephones, internet, computers, email, cell phones, texting, FaceBook, Twitter, billboards, etc. so all of those things should be illegal.

      Like

      • Fun fact – The Post Office did exist before the Constitution and TV and radio are strictly regulated by the FCC and the 1st Amendment does not apply to either. Also as evidenced by the NSA and the patriot act. Our rights to search and seizure are apparently not covered when it comes to telephones, internet, email, cell phones, texting, etc.

        Cheers!

        Like

    • Sorry Lyn, but “automatic” weapons are NOT legally sold to the general public. SEMI- automatic weapons are. Fact is, the majority of “hunting” rifles today are semi-auto. Many shotguns are too.
      I guess we could ban everything but single-shot muzzle loading rifles…or better yet, make it legal to only hunt with bows & arrows. Worked for the original inhabitants here……until WE came along!

      Like

      • Rifles did not become standard military weaponry until the Civil War. The Brown Bess or Charleville muskets could be fired once per minute by militia and three times by regulars.

        Like

    • Wow out of touch! The sarcastic analogy is wrong the correct sarcastic response should be “To many people are killed by vehiclular accidents so we should ban all vehicles because they kill people.” When are folks gonna understand its the person not the tool that needs to be fixed. NRA isn’t evil, your just outta touch.

      Like

      • Not really. More like too many people are killed by vehicular accidents so we should issue licenses to drive and have tests to weed out those unable to safely do so, and revoke licenses for improper use of vehicles, and have criminal penalties for driving without being licensed including jail time. Oh wait, we already do all that because it’s common sense.

        Like

      • Someone u think we should not have regulations on drugs, because they kill people or should I have the Republican point of view and us be able to go buy herion at the grocery store hahahhhah more drugs more overdose deaths duh more guns more gun deaths its a no brainer

        Like

    • You do realize that automatic weapons have not been used in any of the attacks or school shootings recently reported in mainstream media…….

      Like

      • Fun fact! You define “auto” as being able to hold down the trigger and have the weapon continue shooting. Most reasonable people outside the gun industry define it by “being able to shoot a shitload of bullets in a small amount of time” so you combine a gun that shoots as quick as you can pull the trigger and has a magazine of 100 rounds and you’re really just stating semantics.

        Like

  3. Grasping for platitudes when the left should be apologizing, you would think by now they would have had that same eye opening experience that you have when you are a teen and realize your parents were always right and you were just too dumb to understand.

    That is an actual platitude… the above is grasping for anything

    Like

    • Progressives are tired of apologizing to the rest of the world for our cowardly republican step-children who are too afraid to even walk off of their porch without a gun. They are terrified of everyone and everything and should leave the room when the adults are talking. They need a rocker and a pacifier.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Money hungry politicians don’t give a crap about the people of this nation anymore unless you’re very wealthy. They’re so busy taking money from corporations and looking the other way on all topics. They form committees to talk about forming more committees to talk about ways to form more committees. Then everyone blames the “other side” for all the issues. Banning all weapons from tax paying citizens isn’t going to do a ******* thing to stop anything. BTW… The weapons used in the San Bernardino shootings ARE illegal to purchase or own in California, but hey, they still had them. Cocaine is illegal to own in the United States, but people can still get it… Fairly easily, in fact….

    If I’m not mistaken, didn’t we leave Britain in the 1700s because the government was taking too much control over their lives? Well, I think it’s way too late for us to take control back, because NONE of them give a rat’s *** about us. They’re set for life… We pay for their food, their cars, their homes, their health insurance, everything. They have no need to care about us anymore.

    It’s all talk, talk, talk….

    Like

      • I have. They are islands w/ only a minute fraction of the weapons that we have. Japan doesn’t have a 4th amendment interestingly. Those two islands that have fewer weapons to snag, have much fewer citizens and less total area. Another HUGE thing they don’t have? A POROUS BORDER WITH MEXICO.

        So… Yes, I’ve heard of those two places. However, they’re different countries so the effect of trying something like that here in the states would be *gasp* different.

        I’m always interested in hearing unarmed anti gun people talk about how they would take weapons from the armed. Good luck. They have the guns, dummy!

        Like

  5. When did we elect the NRA to our government. Who the bloody hell does Wayne LaPierre think he is? Oh that’s right, he wants to be his idol Adolf Hitler. If anyone would know what would constitute a Nazi-esque anything, it would be him. His propaganda tactics are textbook Hitler!! He is running a Domestic Terrorist Organization that is a supplier for our Domestic Terrorists!! He spews fear mongering propaganda to induce people to arm themselves. Then when people are murdered, the public become even more scared and buy more guns. So that every time a life is taken, he and the gun manufacturers make money!! All the while he is personifying himself as some do gooder, while his only concern is to sell guns and make more money. The man should be in prison for the murders of every person that has died by gun violence in the US since he started this sick campaign to “Arm America”!!! There is a special place in hell for him next to his idol.

    Like

      • Really? Well, I’m sure you’ll have no issue providing a source to that claim and not the democrat part, back then the parties were reversed so stop hanging your hat on Lincoln being a republican when Nixon isn’t even a real current day republican.

        Now let’s see that source. Chop chop!

        Like

    • When did we elect the NRA? When did we elect the SEIU? When did we elect Planned Parenthood? The NRA (A group founded to enure the rights of Minorities against democrats in the south)

      Like

  6. If you really want to know what the actual meaning of the 2nd Amendment is read #46 of the Federalist Papers and stop beliving the garbage that Wayne Lapierre spoonfed SCOTUS along with what I am sure was a boat load of money to buy that ruling. James Madison explains the 2nd Amendment very clearly there.

    Like

  7. Wow, such ignorance in this post. You know, I find that liberals very rarely slam conservatives, yet all I hear from conservatives, is to the point of slander. Conservatives have a chip on they’re shoulders. Generally speaking conservatives are basically a bunch of cry baby’s, bitter as they can be. I am ashamed to live in a conservative community (the south east). Where is the Christian love? I do find liberals to be much more loving and understanding. I am neither a democrats or republican. I vote for who I think is the best candidate. I vote 3rd party since Clinton. He sucked and I voted for him before I knew what he was and I am not talking about Monica. I am talking about his cabal. Him and Madeline Albright, With they’re sanctions in Iraq during Clinton’s administration killed thousand and thousands of children from lack of medical care and clean water, and giving the Chinese access to our nuclear facility’s top secrets. Why don’t y’all get together and represent all people?

    Like

    • Wayne, you apparently know different liberals than I do. On the surface, the ones I know are caring until you disagree with them. From that point on, they resort to name calling, unfriending, ignoring the majority of a conversation and then focusing on only one small minute point that they may be able to argue for because they know they were just proven wrong. Extremists on any side are exactly that, extreme. We need to learn how to get out of this 2 party, force fed candidate system and start voting on the best option, not the best of 2 shitty options. BTW, I own guns and I will continue to buy guns.
      Like anything we try and outlaw, people will start to make their own.

      Like

  8. It’s a bit of catch 22, isn’t it? We’d like to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do harm with them, but the primary propose of a weapon is to injure or kill. (Yes, of course they are lovely for target shooting, too.)
    I propose a federal law requiring for gun ownership a brief psychosocial inquiry, perhaps including a background check and honor-system questionnaire, in which we attempt to gauge the potential gun owners willingness to fire at other humans. If you are likely to open to fire at someone you perceive to be a threat, especially in a crowded public place, you are not considered a responsible gun owner. (Local animal control shelters sometimes run similar checks to help prevent distributing dogs and cats to people with tendencies toward animal abuse and neglect.) If you see no reason to own such an efficient weapon, because you are highly unlikely ever to take it out of it’s locker, then you are given as many guns as you are willing, under duress, to take.

    Like

  9. This is silly…taking away Traffic Laws doesn’t take away the weapon of accidents/wreckless driving, so if you were to compare taking away the weapon within Traffic to taking away the weapon with violence, that would be the car/vehicle/transportation device…I am pretty sure if you take away the mode of transportation, many lives would be saved lol

    Like

  10. So, if I understand this article correctly (and read between the lines); you’re saying the multitude of traffic laws in our country has made the highways and surface streets SAFER. And that since those laws were enacted, we’ve seen a noticeable decrease in drunk driving accidents, high speed police pursuits; felony hit & runs collisions; high speed collisions involving serious injuries or fatalities; reckless driving; fatigued drivers; elder-related collisions; and general head-up-your-ass traffic accidets. Does that sound about right?

    Strange though, because based on that stats I’ve read, it appears more people die in traffic collisions every year than by gunfire. It also appears that people still drive drunk, despite the laws, education, PSA’S, and tragic incidences that have been common in this country for several decades.

    Responsible gun owners are much like responsible drivers. They do their best not to harm anyone, but sometimes accidents happen.

    Likewse, irresponsible gun owners and criminals are much like irresponsible drivers and criminals who get behind the wheel. They don’t care about the law and they have no regard for human life. They’re selfish, foolish, violent, reckless, and cruel.

    I get the attempt at satire, but the analogy failed miserably.

    Like

    • I get your attempt at defending your desire to maintain the status quo where anyone can get a gun with a clip of a hundred rounds and a weapon that spits them out as quick as he can pull the trigger and that since they mean well gun owners shouldn’t have to register their weapons or undergo any kind of scrutiny at the point of purchase but the logic is miserably flawed.

      Like

      • Well, first of all; it’s not a “clip”, it’s a ‘magazine’. This shows how uninformed you really are about firearms and probably explains why they’re scary to you.

        Secondly, not just “anyone” can legally purchase a weapon. There are strict gun laws in effect that try to prevent felons and people with REPORTED psychiatric issues (i.e. people who’ve been placed on a psychiatric hold by police) from buying them.

        I’m all for stricter background checks; especially considering the “no-fly list” disparity. I also belive most responsible gun owners also support that. What difference does registering weapons make though?

        I’m not against registering them, but how does that prevent gun violence any more than registering a car prevents someone from driving like an a-hole? Also, in the same way some kid can take his daddy’s car and get into a wreck; a family member can take someone’s gun and use it to kill. After all, there’s nothing that says the San Bernardino shooter’s wife is the one who purchased the weapons they used.

        In my opinion, laws are great when people choose to obey them. Despite all our laws though, our jails are filled daily with people who choose to rob, rape, steal, assault, defraud, or murder.

        It’s not about creating more laws that only good people will obey. Of course we as a society will always need to add laws that increase safety (i.e. seatbelt laws and drunk driving laws) as we recognize where the problems are.

        How do we get everyone in the world though, to think like the good people in our society and respect both the laws and human life? Solve that problem and you will solve the gun problem.

        Like

      • If you’re hanging your hat on a clip vs magazine argument when the point is 100 rounds is a little excessive for any citizen to be able to fire off before they need to reload I doubt you’ll be converting anyone.

        BTW I own two guns and would be more than happy to take a safety course, register, get a chip that only allows me to shoot it, or… you know? Sensible stuff that if you’re not willing to entertain kind of makes you the sort of person I don’t want having a gun with a one round… Magazine.

        Like

      • When did your point become about 100 round magazines, and did I ever mention I’m all for people having them?

        If you want to address that topic though, then I’ll say this: High capacity magazines have been banned here in California for decades. Despite that, two bank robbers used them on fully automatic AK-47’s (which are also illegal) in North Hollywood back in 1997.

        None of the recent terrorist attacks or mass shootings involved high capacity magazines either, so what did that ban do to save any lives? 100 rounds in ten 10-round magazines is just as dangerous to unarmed citizens as 100 rounds in a single drum.

        The big irony here though, is that you own handguns, but (if I read your comment correctly) haven’t taken a weapons safety course yet. You somehow believe you’re more qualified to own them than I am however, even though I received my training while going through a police academy.

        Like

      • I didn’t say hand guns. Shows how little you know.

        The point is reasonable laws are needed and they’re blocked by those who profit from death and fear. And the whole nation needs California’s laws for them to have teeth or they need to build a wall of their own as of now there just symbolic. You talk a lot. You say very little and you clearly aren’t willing to admit that the current laws are unacceptable to people who don’t worship their guns more than love their families. If your side won’t come to the table and be reasonable the majority of us sane people will be happy to write laws for you because we’ve had enough inaction and we are hip to your old, stale, boring and disproven talking points.

        Like

      • When you say “gun”, it implies you’re referring to handguns to those who actually know what they’re dealing with. We tend to distinguish other weapons as either rifles or shotguns. Helps keep things clear in a discussion.

        So, if I don’t know what you own, then it’s simply because you don’t know how to communicate clearly and instead chooses to paint your words with a broad brush. You also don’t know enough about the subject at hand and don’t have any real world experience to be able to see beyond your narrow minded view.

        Kind of hard to have a sensible dialog with people like that.

        Like

      • LOL. Yet, here you are answering with another post.

        By the way, it’s fairly common knowledge that people resort to personal attacks when they’ve run out of intelligent arguments.

        If you re-read my posts, you’ll see I DO support background checks and support effective gun laws. I never said, or even implied we shouldn’t have laws or encourage responsible gun ownership. You came up with all that, simply because I disagreed with your poor attempt at a satirical news article.

        Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on the topics you want to write about. You’ll at least sound a little more qualified.

        Like

      • I make good money and enjoy my days off. There’s new thing out now called a “smart phone” though, which allows me to browse the internet no matter where I am. So, I can respond to this thread even if I’m waiting in line to watch a movie. It’s pretty awesome, you should look into buying one. They’re all the rage.

        Thanks for the audience, by the way. LOL

        Like

      • Cody, you obviously have problems with reading comprehension if that’s all you were able to take away from my comment. Please re-read it and think before you post.

        Like

      • Car manufacturers have definitely made cars safer…by adding safety features to them. Tempered glass, anti-lock brakes, crumple zones, airbags, and seatbelts are designed to keep the occupants of the cars relatively safe, up to certain speeds.

        All those features mean nothing though to a pedestrian who’s being hit by a car driven by a reckless or drunk driver. They also don’t mean anything to someone whose car is older and doesn’t have those safety features. Even with the best safety features, people have been seriously injured or killed in high speed collisions.

        But this article is talking about the law. We’ve definitely created tons of laws over the years to try guide people into how to drive safely, but idiots will still drive with total disregard for human lives despite all those laws. Can you stop that from happening? The police try, but they can’t be everywhere.

        So, knowing there are reckless drivers out there, you and I wear our seatbelts; look both ways before entering an intersection; drive within the speed limit; stop for red lights; and buy cars with added safety features when we can afford them. As pedestrians, we look both ways before crossing (or, at least I hope we all do).

        In essence, we’re taking active measures to protect ourselves; not simply relying on the law to safeguard us. You wouldn’t remove the seatbelts or airbags from your car, would you? Then why would anyone expect a responsible gun owner to give up their firearm(s), knowing their are people out there like the San Bernardino shooters? Why would anyone ask good people to limit the amount of protection (i.e. magazine limits) they want for themselves?

        Despite our active measures to protect ourselves as drivers though, and despite all our training and practice driving; we (collectively speaking) still sometimes screw up and cause accidents. Why? Because we were either distracted, complacent, fatigued, or used poor judgement.

        As I said before, laws are only effective if people choose to obey them. Imagine how much safer our highways and streets would be if EVERYONE chose to obey traffic laws. Imagine how much safer, peaceful, and richer our live would be if everyone chose to obey the criminal laws.

        Like

  11. What if all semi auto guns were banned and some crazy used a pump 12ga loaded with 00 buck shot. Each shot shell has multiple projectiles dispersed in a wide pattern. How many people and how fast would be hurt or killed. Guess we have to ban that too . Criminals will find a way and that sucks. I don’t know what the fix is but we need to have respect for each other

    Like

  12. How can anyone so patently ignorant and hateful end up the president of such a huge lobbying organization? Is LaPierre the “best and the brightest” that the gun-nuts have to offer? His argument isn’t sound bad logic, it’s just jingoist noise. If we APPLIED the same sort of schema to gun ownership / operation that we do to automobiles, we’d all be a HELL of a lot better off! He’ll never see this, because he’s a tool for the murder-death-kill industry.

    Like

  13. You all do realize this, right?
    This Should Be The News! is a satirical news site in the spirit of much better sites like The Onion. The vast majority of stories are completely fictional and meant to be satirical in nature. We do not fabricate malicious hoax-style stories or try to deceive the legitimate media. All persons mentioned in our news stories are fictional unless they are a celebrity or otherwise noteworthy.

    Like

  14. Mr. La Pierre proves the point that it’s useless to argue with someone who is illogical. In the Bible they call it “throwing your pearls before swine” and we’re warned not to do it as we may get trampled.

    Like

  15. Pingback: NRA Seeks Repeal of Height and Weight Restrictions on Waterslides | This Should Be The News·

Join the discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s