>>1987163>Cars are literally considered weapons in law for many placesYeah, when you use a tool to threaten or hurt someone, the court decides that's "assault with a weapon."
Doesn't matter if it's a gun, a car, or a pen.
>It makes sense to go after the cars tooA does not follow from B. You made an absolutely schizoid leap of irrational emotion from "courts agree that deliberately hitting someone with a car is an attack with a weapon" to "so obviously cars are the next guns!"
Automobiles are indeed one of the most useful tools of the past century. Even as a cyclist, I agree on that.
But if you look at all the jurisdictions actually restraining or negatively influencing car ownership, they are very clear about the reasons for doing it and it's all stuff like, "pollution is a serious local problem and a serious global problem," or "our roads are so over capacity downtown it's dangerous and removing cars will make it less dangerous."
But, of course, a paranoid delusional schizoid can't accept that a western government is broadly an organ for making community-driven decisions and generally operates in a fairly transparent manner (with a few noteworthy exceptions that are indeed deserving of being called out, like "national security").
Go watch fucking CSPAN or whatever and actually grappled with the retardation of your political process. The doddering old people rambling at the microphone for the sake of the media, because no one in the actual room is listening, and no-name representatives clapping and banging the tables like trained seals really is how the cake is baked.
That's actually how it works. Reality is disappointing.
