Comment by zrobotics | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zrobotics | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

At least in the US, cars are very much treated as though they are dangerous enough to effectively be weapons. They must be titled, and are required to have an individual serial number (the VIN). Additionally, in order to operate one the operator must be certified by the state to be competent (driver's license). They are recognized as being dangerous enough to require special insurance, and many states require annual inspect to certify they are safe to operate. And speaking as someone who has registered a home-built car in Wyoming (which is both figuratively and literally the wild west for vehicle regulations) it isn't as easy as just rocking up to the DMV and paying for a set of plates. Before registering I was required to have the car inspected by law enforcement for both a VIN and presence of safety equipment. This is the bare minimum, some states require additional inspection for quality of construction and engineering.

None of the regulations you're talking about are designed to prevent a car from intentionally being used as a weapon, which is what the OP is arguing for. We don't have laws requiring we install security devices in our cars for instance (like some jurisdictions do with trigger locks).

Regulating drones might prevent some accidents and nuisance complaints, but it isn't going to stop people from using them for terrorist attacks.

Laws can't "prevent" misuse of that kind. They add roadblocks, and for that they are valuable.

Of course they can't. If you want to be pedantic s/prevent/make it harder/.

The point still stands. Automobile regulations weren't designed to make it harder for terrorist to use cars as intentional weapons. They do a very poor job at that, and if that were their intended purpose, they wouldn't be worth the cost.

Requiring licenses to operate drones may or may not be worth the cost. If it is, it won't be because it prevents terrorism.

You require 0 of those things to buy or build a car, you only need those things for driving on public roads.

...very much treated as though they are dangerous enough to effectively be weapons

When you start weasling your words, "dangerous enough to effectively be weapons" to be your premise, then you're going to lose the argument.

Except this isn't weaseling words as much as you'd like to think. Many driving instructors use the metaphor that a car is a 2 ton bullet to their students.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com