Ah, a favorite topic...
We don't have controls on everything, especially when it comes to an area that is a "right". And, we do have some gun control, and I do not mean the AWB either.
Car analogy - if a city/county funded and operated a range with taxpayers money, imho, it would be okay for that range to require a shooter to take their safety class prior to using it. It would also be okay for that range to inspect your firearms and ammo to verify that they are safe. Not that dissimiliar from driving on public roads. (However, ranges do not do this because it is about 50 times safer to spend an hour shooting on a range than it is to drive on the highway).
However, NO registration is necessary to own a car. You only need it registered to drive on public roads. Same with a drivers license - you can tool around your uncle's farm all you want in most places without a drivers license and be legal.
If you just want to own cars and fix them up, the only government involvement is to pay taxes on buying it (which is lame since that is about the only "used" item we pay a sales tax on when buying it).
Car registration and drivers licenses are reasonable because we share a taxpayer funded, public road. Neither is required to own a car. So using that analogy, neither should be necessary to own a firearm.
With respect to safety features, many of the federally mandated safety features are waived if you build your own car and again, are necessary only if you drive it on a public road. My go-cart never had a seat belt.
See, even cars are not really controlled.
But ultimately, we do NOT have a right to own or drive a car. That is the real difference.
Lets do a 1st amendment comparison. Many artists and filmmakers (Including pornographers) claim protection under the 1A (imho it applies to the press and speech, not art, but that is another debate).
Well, if you are an artist, you do NOT need a license to practice it. If you want to be a movie maker, buy a camera and start shooting. No license required. Your only "controls" are those related to operating a business, which we have in the firearm community, but you have NO controls to buy that paint brush or that video camera.
You don't need a license to print your own magazine, flier, newspaper. Buy a computer, a printer and a big stack of paper and you can print just about anything you want (with some, but few, limitations with respect to scandalizing other people). And, you do not need to register your printer to do it.
Ask the folks that runs this public forum. Did they register with the government to set it up? Did they have to get a license? Did they have to show need? No, because this freedom of speech in action, and that is a right.
My newly favorite 1A vs 2A comparison. Recently the courts struck down a law that would require all porn sites to get credit card verification for age before someone enters the site. The ACLU was very eager to fund anything that would overturn this incredible "infringement" on the 1A.
So, where are the controls here? Shouldn't porn have a least a little control? If the courts and the leftists in this country gave the 2A half of what they give to the 1A, I would have a quad 50 cal in my backyard!
Freedom of speech comparison - we have this freedom, but we don't have the right to scream "fire" in a crowded theater. Firearm analogy, we have the RKBA, but we sure as heck do not have the right to shoot them at the movie screen when we think the movie stinks! So we DO have some firearm controls.
Consider the not too old Canadian laws which require all guns to be registered. Last I heard, they have NOT solved a single crime with that registration, yet it has cost them tens of millions of dollars. So what would be the purpose of controls on firearms?
Would we control them for safety? Firearms are fairly low on the list of things involved in accidents that result in death or visits to the emergency room. Did you know golf per hour of activity results in more accidental deaths than recreational shooting?
Did you know that at one time, statistics indicated that a 10 year old child is 20 times more likely to drown in the swimming pool in his backyard than to be accidently shot by un unlocked, loaded firearm in his house? (Note, I do not advocate this practice if children live in a household).
IF there was a reason to control them, then at least there would exist an arguable case for it. But if individual firearm ownership is a right, than shouldn't it be treated like our other rights, which are almost 100% hands-off by thegovernment. Remember the words, "Congress shall make no law..."
Finally, I am against any government regulation in our lives unless we can be sure it improves things. It is always expensive, and often causes more problems than it solves. In our society, one of the few things that seem acceptable to infringe upon is the 2A, which is why you have so many folks (like the ones here) who make it an important issue in their lives.
