Posted on 06/09/2010 8:11:25 AM PDT by HandsOffMyFreedom
“You are defining “freedom” as being able to get just beyond what the law says.”
Not at all. Life isn’t so black and white, there are many shades of gray. I do my damnedest to be a model citizen, but there are occasions when you inadvertently blow a light, either by misjudging the length of the yellow or some other distraction as you approach the intersection.
Technology should NOT be used as a weapon by the state against the citizenry. Period.
“Re read your post...it reeks of rebellion.”
Reeks? An interesting description that says much about your preference for subservience. Given the changes I’ve seen in just my one lifetime, I’d say rebellion may not be a bad thing.
“...if that same government totally ignored people who break the laws of civil society, would they not be adding to irresponsible behavior by allowing it to occur?”
Whose arguing for that? Not me. I have no patience for @$$hole drivers who flaunt the laws for whatever reason.
In a perfect world, people would recognize the social contract they’re part of in a civilized society, and behave accordingly. Putting the blame on government instead of where it belongs, on the miscreant, is faulty logic.
But in the Nanny State, people expect that the government will see to all of their needs. So why should they place any limits on their own behavior? Or even mature, for that matter?
Put a dummy (sorry, Mannequin) in it and it will work better, had this happen to me when I was 17 in SC and I know it works.
Au contraire mon frère.
A busy intersection sees thousands of vehicles crossing every weekday. Say 3000 for an imaginary "dangerous" intersection. At a 1% failure rate that would be 30 cars in accidents, assuming each accident is a two car that would be 15 accidents a day.
That simply doesn't happen at any intersection. That would be an epidemic. I used 99% as a place holder.
Six Sigma processes are 99.99966% defect free. That's considered the rarely reached upper realm of human perfection. In our imaginary intersection 15 accidents per 3000 car crossings is an accident/crossing rate of .005, still too high for a real life "dangerous" intersection.
Now you research and find the average accident (and remember most accidents are simply fender benders with no injuries) rate at any red light monitored intersection.
Then your point will be made...or not.
Exactly! Why are we arguing again?
Knowing that man would not be perfect, God established the civil government.
" God established civil government to be an avenger who brings wrath upon those who practice evil. The civil government’s power to use the sword is legitimate in certain limited cases. The Bible has mandated that the power of the sword is to keep the peace, to protect those who do what is right. Civil rulers are said to be “ministers of God” similar to the way pastors are “ministers of God.” They are God’s “deacons” in their designated governments, one ecclesiastical and the other civil."
But in the Nanny State, people expect that the government will see to all of their needs. So why should they place any limits on their own behavior? Or even mature, for that matter?
Then we should agree; enforcement of (moral) laws, hence placing limits on people's wrongful behavior is the opposite of that of a Nanny State.
LOL...I fled the city of insanity years ago. I only work there for the high wages.
Let me guess, in your world, you NEVER "narc" anyone out right?
Actually, I think you are. Aside from the occasional libertarian that I run into on here (usually in cop hating and of course pro dope smoking threads) the vast majority of people on FR believe in God. As I pointed out in an earlier post, God created the civil magistrate for a reason:
God established civil government to be an avenger who brings wrath upon those who practice evil. The civil government’s power to use the sword is legitimate in certain limited cases. The Bible has mandated that the power of the sword is to keep the peace, to protect those who do what is right. Civil rulers are said to be “ministers of God” similar to the way pastors are “ministers of God.” They are God’s “deacons” in their designated governments, one ecclesiastical and the other civil."
Either you're "on" the side of the guy recklessly driving down the freeway (you're on his side by not reporting him and allowing him to continue to be a threat to society with his disregard for human life) or you're not. There is no "middle ground". And please note: the keyword here is "reckless". I'm not going to waste my time or the police depts time calling in on some guy going 75 in a 60 UNLESS he almost runs me or someone else off the road while doing so. Heck, I've called in on guys that WERE doing the speed limit solely because it was obvious that they were DUI. You need to get your priorities straight there pardner; police officers are the good guys, irresponsible people aren't.
Read my other posts about the role of the civil magistrate.
Yet if you obeyed those laws that were meant to be obeyed, those depts. couldn't get a dime off of you, right?
Police are hardly the ones to preach about morality. They speed illegally all the time.
Are you referring to while they're on duty or off?
Ah, so the Nanny State has to provide "speed bumps" to keep it's citizens in line? Oh my, the hypocrisy is getting waist deep in here now!
Are you serious, buyer beware when it comes to enforcement of laws that protect citizens from reckless drivers? Go back to your Ayn Rand quotes and double check on that one. (it deals with property laws, not criminal).
So the rule of law should be based on each individual's "comfort zone"?
Is there a need for speed laws? If so, what should the signs say, something like "35 MPH or whatever you're comfortable with"? As mentioned in an earlier post, unless I break traffic laws, those municipalities won't get a dime out of me when it comes to traffic laws. But then, libertarians like yourself HATE government, and the only "good" government in your eyes is one that legalizes vice. Right?
When an irresponsible driver violates my "liberty" to travel freely about without worrying about my safety due to his or her irresponsible behavior, I'm hardly "passive" when I pick up the phone and dial 911.
Now suppose that the next day the woman is found dead in your room. Is the photo enough to convict you of the murder?"
Then, let's say that they found peanut butter on top of the refrigerator and that a moose was seen mowing the grass on the golf course. Yes, I can see the danger...
I won't dignify this with a rebuttal.
It is curious that you even write this tripe. If it is so very "accidental" and "explainable" that you were just looking out the window and daydreaming and paying no attention while you "inadvertently blow a light", go tell it to a human judge and let him tell you THAT IS WHY PEOPLE DIE when self-justifying rationalizers drive without following the rules. Or he may agree with you and let you walk. Amazing...
Go catch up on the past 50 posts. Call us when you read the thread.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.