Attachment 119391
Printable View
Machines don't kill people (much) People kill people.
(Ban people?)
I agree. Lets send this idea to Congress.
It's always a debate about how much governments should get involved in protecting people from themselves. To be honest, I have very little sympathy for people who kill or hurt themselves doing stupid things, especially when they're illegal. I do have a great deal of sympathy for innocent bystanders who are killed or hurt by those people, as there often are. There really is no good reason for street cars that can far out-strip the legal speed limit on ant street that they'll ever drive on. There are those who will drive a car like that and never use that extra power but they would be in the minority. The vast majority of people who buy a car like that will want to open it up at some point and some will do so regularly. It's dangerous and it's against the law so there's no justification for being able to.
This is more of a hit on the US gun restrictions. Congress wants to limit our guns saying that guns are dangerous. They are using cars as an analogy.
Raise the gas prices enough and only ident will bother even renting one.
Street legal auto requirements & dis-allowances are governed by the state not the federal government.
470hp? I have personally witnessed three deaths and several life-threatening injuries in nearly two decades of racing shifter karts with less than 1/10th the hp. Therefore we should ban all motors more powerful than a moped.Quote:
Originally Posted by dclamp
That's a rather disingenuous comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by homer13j
Where's Robdog888?
You volunteering for castration? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gruff
Tools don't build houses; people build houses. How many houses are those people going to build without tools? I don't know whether you're being serious but that is a ridiculous argument in any form, but it still gets trotted out regularly. Barrel-bottom scraping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gruff
I think the whole internal combustion thing has been a mistake from the get go. Massive polution, global warming, dogs and cats living in harmony and now speed crazed mayhem on our roads. We need to go back to the horse and cart. It's the only way forward.
but they sure help, a human with his bare hands is going to have a hard time killing 10's never mind 100's of people, but give that human a machine gun ....Quote:
Machines don't kill people (much)
Forward?Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyDexter
Attachment 119431
Cars may pollute the air, but at least they don't poop.
It makes me want that car.
1. It's a cool car;
2. It makes fun of idiots;
3. There's nothing like having something you are not going to use - but if you need it, you have it;
4. Screw the government;
5. Just because.
I also want a 338 Lapua chambered rifle. Why? Who care's why, it is fracking cool to be able to shoot a projectile powerful enough to destroy an armored car at a mile away. I also needed more suppressors. Which means more guns. To mount on my car. Machine guns. And turrets. And armor plating. Yeah, all that.
Because zombies.
It wouldn't be practical for very long in the case of zombies. The problem I have with all those scenarios is that gasoline isn't very stable. It starts turning to varnish fairly quickly, so the supply of usable gas would end a whole lot faster than the supply of what was gas.
I think an armored tractor, probably one from the 60s or 70s, might be the most practical. I think a nice road grader might work: Spacious cab, good clearance, reliable diesel engine, lots of mounting points.
@Homer: That's a point that is often overlooked, but still....those can't be road apples! There are some mighty big chunks there.
Its funny as hell :lol:Quote:
How does this make you feel
Cool car, totally against the "legal" limit...Oh and carmageddon, what a lovely game, i was melting pedestrians screaming die dieeeeeeeee muhahaaaarrrrr( arrrgggg united - bridge of death)!!!!!
If American don't need 470hp, Europeans surely do!
My immediate thought was what qualifies as "Innocent people", and how many of the 32,367 fell into that category, not the drivers of course.
The second thought was OK, if you want to blame the car, how many of those 32,367 actually involved a car similar in capabilities to that car.
9,878 of those deaths involved alcohol-impaired-driving fatalities, so that is probably more of a factor than the car in those cases.
Also, 9,272 of the 32,367 deaths were in light trucks, which has to outnumber the deaths in a high powered car like the above by a large margin as well.
Ironically, 2011 was actually a historic low death rate on the "deaths per 100 million vehicle miles driven" statistics.
Anyway, I'm not going to dwell on it any further. If you want to read more on the 2011 data, you can check out this pdf file from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Wait to you see what i got coming for my 30th next month ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I am 12
Geeze, your only 30 Ident?! Man you're nuthin' but a wee babby! :D:D:D