You and I may be set to disagree, and that's fine. 'Merica, and all that. Here's how a car and a gun differ. If I point my car towards you, on the sidewalk and rev my engine, I'm threatening you. If instead, I exit my car and draw a gun and point it towards you, I'm still threatening you.
The key difference that most people make here is the fact that a gun can threaten over a fair distance, with nearly-instantaneous effect. The car cannot. Also, once I fire a round, that bullet will go wherever physics and aim dictate and there's no changing my mind. If I "surge" my car towards you, or stomp on the gas full-tilt or whatever, up until the point I actually squish you underneath I can change direction or velocity relatively easily.
Also, let's not forget that the car has a commonly-accepted-by-society purpose. Transportation. People screw up, or make poor choices and yes, others are hurt or killed. But a gun has basically one purpose - to damage or destroy a target. The moment you point it at a person, they aren't expecting you to trick-shot the diamond off their ring, or light their cigarette. They expect to be threatened with lethal force for whatever reason the gunman offers.
Why is this such a hard rationale to accept?
Look, I'm not a perfect driver but to assume others will break the rules as you do is just asking for trouble.
Gamergate had nothing to do with misogyny...
Maybe for the first picosecond of its existence. It may truly have wanted to shed light on unusually close ties between critic and dev. But my God man, how many hate-filled tweets of vitriol aimed at these women, tagged with #GamerGate have you seen?
How has what you experienced / currently experience affected your dev and planning processes? Does it enter into your spitballing/design sketch/engineering phases at all? Are you making certain decisions to emphasize your position(s) or expose theirs?
Though, as I hear it, such unrestricted competition would lead to boondocks areas being underserved because there's no tie-in incentive to serve them and far less potential return, for heavy infrastructure services at least.
*Owner in the sense of the paying entity running it.