|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
MrTarzan 
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
 |
Posted on: Mar. 15 2004,7:17 pm |
|
   |
I think I understood Truths point. A seatbelt law would of course be ridiculous for a motorcycle. I think in a car someone should wear one, but it should not be law.
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
Truth
Group: Members
Posts: 552
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 15 2004,10:03 pm |
|
 |
Ok fine. I'm tired. AHAHAH the cars are a privilege can we just agree on that as well. Please?
--------------
The best weapon against an enemy is another enemy.
Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
MrTarzan
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 15 2004,10:49 pm |
|
|
No. Why are they a privilege? I mean I can even understand having normal requirements for driving cars in the interest of public safety (which is the only reason the laws were developed), like you cannot be blind, but if I prove that I can see, and that I am sober, and that I know how to operate a vehicle, who has the right to deny me? Every time that we invent something to advance civilization, we regulate it and regulate it and regulate it, until it is completely controlled by the government. At what point do you cross the line from giving me a privilege to denying me my rights? If you make rules, and I can pass them, then when you deny me the privilege, you are denying me equal rights. So then we get the argument back to real basic legal arguments of when are regulations to give me the "privilege" of driving too invasive and excessive and truly denying me my civil rights? This is the argument, not as easily dismissed with the statement it is a privilege. Remember "the pursuit of happiness" is in the Constitution too. Not just life and liberty, though this argument would be argued in a law class under liberty also. Driving is a great leveler where all people, short, tall, fat, skinny, beautiful, ugly, and even disabled, are able to move freely on highways paid for by all of us, so is it a "privilege" more than my right to be happy and travel as long as I do it without harming others? Sure in the traffic code, but so what, that is written by legislatures and can be changed, so the debate is once again back to which rules are too much? I think a seatbelt law, (again remember I always wear mine and say that it is stupid not too), is crossing the line except in the case of minors.
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 15 2004,11:40 pm |
|
|
I watched/listened to the senate coverage today and there was very little discussion of whether or not it was right or wrong to give it primary law status. The only thing they seemed to care about is where the money for the fine was going to go. I think they said they wanted to fund detox centers with 75% of the money collected from the increased fine.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
Frustrated
Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 16 2004,9:56 am |
|
|
It's Minnesota - what else would you expect!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
GEOKARJO
Google This!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 7799
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 16 2004,11:57 am |
|
|
Driving Is a Privialge.......Property Rights are still Property Rights...
In the First election, only property owners could vote and you had to be a man........Lord help us that changed. We gave women the damn vote and look where we are now. Fighting for our rights......and begging for piece.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
