When

authoritarian politicians push for more gun control laws,

they often claim to be doing so in order to save lives.

On the

surface, there's some validity to the claim. Guns are

dangerous. The more of them there are, the more people

are likely to get hurt and killed by them.

But when

people start coming up with ways to do away with my

rights in order to protect me, I tend to be suspicious of

their motives. I tend to wonder whether some of them, at

least, have a hidden agenda that is more focused on

centralizing power and control than on saving lives.

If you

doubt it, ask yourself why these same lovers of

government control aren't picketing the Georgia Capitol

during every legislative session demanding more stringent

drivers license requirements and stiffer penalties for

teens who drive dangerously.

Teenagers

are dying by the car loads in this state, where you can

get a drivers license without having ever driven a car on

a public street.

Let those

words sink in.

For those

of you who just arrived from Peoria, Georgia's license

testing is a joke. You have to pilot a car between some

orange cones, stop at a "stop sign" and make a

turn, all in a parking lot.

Then you

get a license that allows you to drive a car anywhere,

anytime, with as many passengers as you can fit in, under

any circumstances.

If you are

16 years old and you get caught speeding, weaving in and

out of lanes, tailgating and running red lights, you will

have to pay a fine and you might have your license

suspended for a short time.

Every once

in awhile, the legislature passes new laws that increase

penalties for dangerous driving, but when parents start

being inconvenienced because their children have lost

their drivers licenses, they express their displeasure

and the next year the legislature repeals those laws.

And I can't

help wondering, where are the cries of anguish from the

gun control crowd?

Here's what

would make sense:

� New license testing that takes at

least a half hour and involves driving in traffic, under

a variety of circumstances, using all of the maneuvers

any driver has to execute every day. Yes, it would cost

more money. The fee for the testing would have to be

adjusted to allow for that.

� A graduated license for teens.

Sorry, but there is no way 16-year-olds should have full

driving privileges. The beginner license should allow

driving only on surface streets and never, under any

circumstances, should a 16-year-old be allowed to drive

with a car load of passengers.

After a

given time with a beginner license, the teen should be

given a more stringent test before receiving an

intermediate license, increasing the freedom a little

more. Any ticket, for any offense, should double the

waiting time before the intermediate test could be taken.

The final,

full privilege of driving anywhere, anytime, under any

circumstances should be conveyed only to those 18 or

older, and only after a still more stringent test has

been passed.

� License forfeiture for any teenager

convicted of reckless driving.

Why make

the rules tougher for teens than for adults? Because

teens are more likely to be tempted to show off, to drive

recklessly to impress their friends. And they don't have

the experience under their belts - they're not ready

to be given free rein. And because the privilege of

driving is so precious to teenagers that, if they know

they risk losing it, they are more likely to obey the

law.

I can also

hear you thinking, "Aren't you displaying some

authoritarian tendencies yourself? If we can have tighter

traffic laws, why can't we ban guns?"

Because the

Constitution doesn't guarantee the right to drive an

automobile.

Even if we

assume that the founders of our nation would have granted

such a right if they had known that the automobile would

one day be invented, the full rights of citizenship are

not conveyed until one reaches adulthood. There is still

ample justification for making a young person's entry

into the driving world a gradual one, and a tightly

controlled one.

Who knows?

If the law wouldn't allow a 16-year-old to load a car up

with 12- or 13-year-olds and take them anywhere, any

time, maybe those Rockdale County teens wouldn't have had

a way to get to their orgies.

<!-------------