There’s a more simple way to do this. The amount of time it takes for your turbo to reach full boost as measured from the point you go from “cruising throttle” to having the throttle wide open is “lag.”

At higher RPMs lag should be less, at lower RPMs you're going to notice.

Try not to think in absolutes. No measures can possibly prevent all violence (via guns or whatever), the idea is to reduce to the greatest extent possible.

I’d like to point out another country, Switzerland, which also has a very high rate of gun ownership but a low violent crime rate. There are obvious culture…

I think it'd be fun to have a turbo model. It's a sleeper that could even fool most car enthusiasts.

That we need to adjust our current legislation to make it more difficult for violent people to get their hands on weapons that are designed to kill things. Ideally we need to preserve access to these weapons for non violent people, because if nothing else we each have a right to our own self defense.

How it went from that to what it became.... is amazing.

I tend to prefer sporty FWD cars on the street. More throttle always stops unwanted rotation and too much throttle never creates it.

I didn’t say any of those things.

What are you trying to accomplish here? I think it’s clear that I am of the opinion that guns need better regulations. Is this an attempt to make me change my opinion? Because it’s not working.

I don’t really care if a Remington 700 is or is not more deadly than an AR-15. What I care about is that neither of them be…

Certainly. This is clearly a very complicated subject. The solution that alleviates the problem of veterans shooting themselves at an insane rate is clearly not going to resolve the mass shooter issue.

You need a license to drive car. They don’t give licenses to people who have a history of doing really dangerous things with cars, like driving them drunk. Yes, you can buy a car, but you can’t use it. If you do use it and don’t register it, you’re likely to get caught really quick due to the lack of plates.

I’m fine with guns. I grew up with guns, have had guns, enjoy shooting clays, have earned “marksman” in the military, and can dismantle/reassemble an M-16 in less than a minute. I’ll probably own a few more weapons in my lifetime.

Guns don’t kill people, but they sure do make it easier.

I am now for repealing the 2nd amendment. I can take an extreme stance too.

We shouldn’t work to fix a problem with mass murders because of swimming pools?

Thank you for highlighting my point so cleanly

If it would make you feel better, we can ask the government to make licensing, registration, and insurance a requirement to purchase a vehicle in the same piece of legislation that would require the same steps for weapons ownership and transfers.

What is there to care about? Heavy trucks exist to move goods from place to place, allowing for local and national economies to function. That they can be make-shift weapons is not entirely relevant to the lethality of a gun. These are two different subjects. That I can stab you with a Buick does not mean that…

Well, then by comparison adding some simple regulations requiring registration, licensing, insurance, and background checks for all weapons owners or transfers of weapons (as applicable) surely seems like a pretty logical next step, given that there's still a problem and we've already banned grenade launchers.

Can we regulate weapons in the United States to the same extent that we regulate vehicles? Because we've at least tried to take reasonable measures to decrease vehicle fatalities while still allowing society to benefit from the technology.

“If the ideology is there, anything can be used as a weapon.”

Absolutely.

I'm merely venting my frustration at weak domestic weapons trade regulations.