On 10/20/05, Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's the way the free market works. If I can afford the gasoline then I > take a ride.
some who can afford gas choose other means of transportation > If I can't then I stay home. I resent the fact that the > government says it's a privilege that they allow me to drive my car. on a private road you can do anything you want, even drive while impaired. on a publically funded and maintained road, it's a different matter all together. i don't think i have a problem with the state saying "prove to us that you know how to pilot a car before we let you drive on public roads" > It > implies that they can take away that privilege at anytime. indeed, but you do have certain constitutional rights not to be treated by the gov't except according to the rule of law, which would mean that they can't treat you in an abitrary and capricious manner. > I say that I'm > free to drive my car unless I act in such a way that I endanger others. i'm sure we can trust you to drive your car in a safe manner, as you know that you can be severely sanctioned if your driving skills don't reach a satisfactory standard. but what of an 18 year old crack addict? or a severe alcoholic? are you saying that we must wait until they plow into a school bus full of ten year olds before removing their privelege (or right or whatever) to drive? that's just plain scary! -frank <snip>> -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
