Security over liberty?

Not always...My cousin is alive today because he wasn't wearing his seat belt...

 

That's not true. I didn't even "ASK" the police to wipe the fees for my only ticket and they did. I went in to pay my ticket but I wanted to "clear my good name" in that I wasn't lying to the officer when I said the speedometer was broken so I had showed them the receipt for getting the guage fixed.

I would have been fine to pay that ticket because regardless of the reason, I WAS in the wrong and I HAD broken the law. The police department decided to drop the fine because it was clear to them that it was indeed a MISTAKE rather than intentional illegal behavior.

If the traffic law system was about money, they would have charged the credit card I handed them and shrugged off my personal "moral obligation" to prove I was not lying to the officer. They did not.


A similar situation happened with our eldest son, he was driving a friend home and got tagged by this obscure law none of us had even heard of; after the driver permit they get a 6 month "provisional" license where they can't have unlicensed passengers. Long story short; our son went in to discuss with the police if he could pay off the $280 ticket in smaller payments because he doesn't have a job atm, and the police wiped the ticket because he had showed responsibility by coming in to talk to them.

Again, if it were about money they would have taken his money, rather than wiping his ticket.


Fix it tickets as well, if it were about money then they wouldn't wipe the fines off for getting the issue fixed.

 

It's very comforting that so many people love The Big Police and Military State, just because of SOME incidences of benevolence on their part.

 

That would be a foolish conclusion. I just don't like being ROBBED. Do you?

 

Relax. Take a deep breath and gather your thoughts. Get all the proof you can and present before the courts. While you think you can't win, there is proof you can.

I got them to drop a bogus criminal trespassing charge they were trying to nail some friends and I on...

 

Even the most honest cop will rarely turn in a corrupt one. It's a common idea that police officers are supposed to protect one another....Even when it involves lying about or overlooking corruption. This is the same type of mind set that drives people in poor neighberhoods to protect criminals.....

 

What I want to the nation to do, is repeal speed limit laws, and design ground transportation to be more safe. Currently it's just rubber tires on a tar road swerving whichever way they please.

 

Then have the matter heard in court!

 

I shouldn't have to even do that. A bloody revolution is necessary to overturn The Police and Military State, at this point.

 

I'm sorry, but what is your reasoning for that? You have absolutely no proof backing this claim, and I think its ludicrous. Especially since stats show people are more likely to get into an accident while wearing a seatbelt because they feel safe.

 

"SOME"? Try ALL. I guess perhaps the difference is that "I" follow the laws. These are simple laws that are designed to protect everyone without undue infringement upon my "rights." The reason we had to put in traffic laws is because people were IRRESPONSIBLE and these laws brought ORDER to our roadways.

As a driver, I do NOT have the "right" to ignore common sense things such as stopping to look both ways when crossing traffic - aka stop signs and traffic lights. As a driver, I do NOT have the "right" to ignore common sense things such as driving too fast for my reactions if something goes wrong. - aka speed limits.

You do NOT have the right to fly through traffic on the highway as fast as possible endangering the lives of every person around you. Does the family in the mini-van you just cut off and caused to swerve into the ditch while you were weaving in and out of traffic deserve injury because YOU failed to plan ahead the time it takes to SAFELY get wherever you were going?

You also do NOT have the right to endanger my kids, dogs, and the nice old lady down the street who just happens to be checking her mail when you come flying around the blind corner and run her down because YOU were unable to avoid her due to your SPEED. Does she deserve to DIE because YOU are in a hurry?

The government is supposed to protect us and while I can, and do, agree that there is a line where it could become a "police state" as you say, traffic laws are so far from that level it's not even close to a comparison. I find your position on this is over-reactive and irrational.

 

I will give you that I am more scare (*)(*)(*)(*)less of people who drive carelessly injuring or killing me and my family, than I am afraid "traffic laws" will morph into a "police state" and "rob" me of my freedom. Yes.

What of MY rights though sir, my "right" to use the public road system that "I" pay to maintain in safety?

Why do you feel that YOUR right to speed on public roads is more important than MY right to be safe on public roads?

Should I bring my bow with me to blow out the tires of those who would run that stop sign and infringe on my right of way?

 

So you want to violate my freedoms for the ILLUSION that such violation of my freedoms will protect you? For real? (*)(*)(*)(*) you.

You have no "right" to "safety" or security. You have a right to life, liberty, and property.

 

Telling me to (*)(*)(*)(*) off sure makes you look reasonable and worthy of debating laws... Just sayin'

In any event, taking your words then - I have the right to "life, liberty, and property." Doesn't the government have a duty to protect my LIFE and my PROPERTY which could be easily taken from me by others careless driving?

IF you would argue that the goverment does not have such duty, then I again, will bring up the issue of me being a "coward" - If I must take an "uncowardly" approach to protecting myself on public roads without the assistance of police and traffic laws. Then should I be allowed to use my bow to blow out the tires of anyone who would infringe upon my right of way at an intersection?

If that is unallowed, then HOW am I allowed to defend MY right to life and property from the careless driving of others?

 

I understand what you want, but do you really believe it will happen?

You would have to convince a majority of the country to agree with your line of thinking, And I cannot for the life of me see that happening.

I understand slippery-slope fallacy. However, I am willing to trade some of my liberty for safety and security. The world is just not so black and white for me. I can see and I want to live in the shades of gray.

 

Design the roads to be safer and change Big Car InSCAMance so that it gives you back the money they ROBBED from you after a certain cyclic period of time, if you haven't caused adequate money amounts in damages by that time.

There.

 

Possibly, but cops in most states do not require their cops to show you their radar gun. They just have to swear that was the speed they saw you going. I haven't sat in a cop car in the last 5 years so I cannot say what the new radars look like.

I do have a lead foot and have been rightly caught, but there were times I was hardly going over and the cop was sitting in a parking lot across the street (4-lanes) and somehow nailed me down the road saying I was speeding when I wasn't. I called him it out on it and said I'd be seeing him in court so he actually dropped the ticket, but then cited me for not having my seatbelt on when I had just taken it off in front of him to get my registration. I told him he could go (*)(*)(*)(*) himself. I got it dropped in the end, but this occurred a few weeks after coming home from my first tour in Iraq.

 

Experience is the simple answer. BTDT.

 

Ah. That is a very common fallacy. To assume your personal experience is what reality is. Let me attempt to open your eyes...

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=33379
http://www.newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest27.htm
http://oneminute.rationalmind.net/mandatory-seatbelt-laws/
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2006/11/automobile-safety.html

 

Again I say, get it on the ballot and let us vote on the increased cost to completely redesign our road systems "safely" so that we can repeal traffic laws VS expecting folks to follow the laws already in place which are designed to make the roads that already exist safe.


Wait, how did you pull auto insurance into this... Meh, car insurance is a decent safety net, I mean I would feel bad for the Joe who's car gets totaled through no fault of his own and it takes him 10 years or more to recoup the cost of damages and medical costs from the idiot who caused the wreck.

Plus if we consider that poor Joe is living pay check to pay check like we say most of America does so he can't afford it. Next thing ya know we'll have the government increasing taxes upon us all to create some liberal bleeding heart fund to pay for both Joe, and the idiot at fault's, new car and medical expenses...

 

What silly assed stupid thing did you hope to achieve by posting links to unsubstantiated OPINIONS?

You wish to dispute my opinion, that is your right. Posting opinions of others does nothing to prove or disprove my opinions. I'll take my experience over your mindless bloggers.

 

Most of these were based on facts if you actually stop to read them. But it still doesn't matter. THe government has no authority to tell me I have to wear a seat belt.

 

When one nonsensically tries to prove their case by linking to opinion and blog sites,,,,,,,,,,,,WHY would I bother reading trash you swallow?

 

You're subscribing to "majority rule". The problem with that is that the majority are morons.

Again. A much better and less THIEVING system would be one where after every year or so, I got paid back at least half, if not most, of the total STOLEN money that belongs to ME.

E.g., if I earn a total of $100 per month, or $1,200 a year, that The State now possesses in STOLEN money in the form of "car insurance", and I was not at fault for causing $1,200 in damages during that year, I should get at least half or most of it back. The only reason why I'd accept not getting ALL of it back, is because some of that would, like everyone's STOLEN money, have to go to repairing car accidents, I guess.

Now, if I did cause $1,200 or more in damages, they should not give me any of that back, and charge me an increased rate for the next year. If I caused a $5,000 accident, then $3,800 in total would have to be taken from the total outright stolen money of everyone paying into Car Inscamance. And indeed, they should raise my monthly rate for the next year, but give half or most of it back the end of the next year.

There is NO problem with that, other than that Big Car InSCAMance wouldn't make as much profit from stealing from people. However, people would still be covered, and if they weren't responsible for any problems, most of the money that Car Inscamance STOLE from them would be RIGHTFULLY returned.

The only POSSIBLE way for you to have ANY problems with this, is if you are an outright criminal psychologically.