Again, Congress wasn’t going to do much besides offer thoughts and prayers, so San Jose Mayor Sam LiccardoAn automobile can be deadly, but it’s not the reason it’s built. And yet, because cars can pose a danger to others, they are highly regulated as a matter of public safety, and without much fuss.
Car owners are required to pay a substantial tax at the point of purchase. They must also register their vehicles annually and carry insurance for any damage to life and property. Liccardo, displaying common sense, talked up the parallels between the two products and the need to do whatever could be done to make the city safer. He pre-butted the constitutional argument to come: “While the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, it does not require taxpayers to subsidize it.”in favor of imposing on gun owners some of the same responsibilities familiar to anyone with a car.
This was possible, in part, because mayors are more likely to be less partisan than the average member of Congress, and much more practical and more accountable to the voters they serve.
Who is Margaret Carlson?
How’d that work out in the heller case? It will be over turned by SCOTUS
Who's doing the shooting?
The sheer stupidity of these gun control arguments. Why don’t these people look at who’s committing the crimes? At least start researching instead of shrieking at the sky
'Shall not be infringed' You gun control will lose and there's little you can do to change that.