is using $26 mil for truck seatbelt ads a good stewardship of your tax dollars?
DTR's Self Appointed Beer Advisor
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
From: On my way to Hell... Need a lift?
Originally posted by RustyJC
Britt,
Like I said, go make your argument where it counts. Try to convince the courts of your "right" to do dope. Just be sure to wear your seat belt when you go (gotta keep the thread on topic, right?)
Rusty
Britt,
Like I said, go make your argument where it counts. Try to convince the courts of your "right" to do dope. Just be sure to wear your seat belt when you go (gotta keep the thread on topic, right?)
Rusty
Right now I've got to run to the liquor store to get some more beer. It's a good thing some things are still legal around here. I wouldn't have anything to do with my spare time.
WearinghisseatbeltgoingtotheliquorstoreBritt
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,564
Likes: 6
From: Cummins Technical Center, IN
Originally posted by jfpointer
In that case, I'll just wait until somebody rediscovers the Constitution...
In that case, I'll just wait until somebody rediscovers the Constitution...
jlh
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,686
Likes: 0
From: Battle Creek Michigan
Originally posted by RustyJC
Edwin,
I would suggest that, since you hold a minority position on this issue, the following might be in order:
1. Find an attorney who agrees that citizens of the United States have a Constitutional right to snort coke, smoke crack and shoot up on heroin. I suspect that the ACLU might be willing to take this case pro bono.
2. Find a sympathetic court and plead the following:
~A. The Constitution of the United States guarantees to its citizens the unfettered right to snort coke, smoke crack and shoot up on heroin.
~B. That right is being violated, and you, as a member of an aggrieved minority, seek redress.
3. If the sympathetic court rules in your favor, realize that the fat lady hasn't sung yet. The applicable U.S. Attorney will certainly appeal, and eventually, the case will work its way up to the United States Supreme Court. Would you like to guess what your chances are of having this "right" affirmed by SCOTUS?
When did I ever say that America was a democracy, not a republic (which, by the way, is defined as a representative democracy)? You seem to have erected a straw man on this issue for the express purpose of knocking it down.
Rusty
Edwin,
I would suggest that, since you hold a minority position on this issue, the following might be in order:
1. Find an attorney who agrees that citizens of the United States have a Constitutional right to snort coke, smoke crack and shoot up on heroin. I suspect that the ACLU might be willing to take this case pro bono.
2. Find a sympathetic court and plead the following:
~A. The Constitution of the United States guarantees to its citizens the unfettered right to snort coke, smoke crack and shoot up on heroin.
~B. That right is being violated, and you, as a member of an aggrieved minority, seek redress.
3. If the sympathetic court rules in your favor, realize that the fat lady hasn't sung yet. The applicable U.S. Attorney will certainly appeal, and eventually, the case will work its way up to the United States Supreme Court. Would you like to guess what your chances are of having this "right" affirmed by SCOTUS?
When did I ever say that America was a democracy, not a republic (which, by the way, is defined as a representative democracy)? You seem to have erected a straw man on this issue for the express purpose of knocking it down.
Rusty
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,686
Likes: 0
From: Battle Creek Michigan
Originally posted by t-7 firefighter
In a perfect world that might work. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Blame it on the left if you want too, but you and I both know it isn’t a leftist problem. If you believe that “old fashioned trips to the woodshed at a young age” would work then I feel you are sorely mistaken.
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
People are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it. You CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT govern morality. You cannot force your morals on someone else. Just because something seems right to you doesn’t mean it’s right for the next person. If I choose to smoke weed in my own house that I bought and paid for, by myself, with no one else around. How could you possibly care????? Do you think the storm troopers should come busting down my door because I choose to smoke a little weed. ( I don’t of course but this is just an example (had to throw that in there). Do you lay awake at night thinking about what other people are doing in their free time? Don't take it personally, I'm not just asking you but all of the other "moral" people out there. Why would you care if it did? If you don't like it then don't do it. It's as simple as that.
We don’t like it, but someone is driving drunk right now. Alcohol is one of the worst drugs out there, but hey, it’s legal…. Go figure.
Which is all the more reason to wear your seatbelts guys. (to get back to the original topic).
Won't be much longer before this is shut down.
Britt
In a perfect world that might work. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Blame it on the left if you want too, but you and I both know it isn’t a leftist problem. If you believe that “old fashioned trips to the woodshed at a young age” would work then I feel you are sorely mistaken.
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
People are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it. You CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT govern morality. You cannot force your morals on someone else. Just because something seems right to you doesn’t mean it’s right for the next person. If I choose to smoke weed in my own house that I bought and paid for, by myself, with no one else around. How could you possibly care????? Do you think the storm troopers should come busting down my door because I choose to smoke a little weed. ( I don’t of course but this is just an example (had to throw that in there). Do you lay awake at night thinking about what other people are doing in their free time? Don't take it personally, I'm not just asking you but all of the other "moral" people out there. Why would you care if it did? If you don't like it then don't do it. It's as simple as that.
We don’t like it, but someone is driving drunk right now. Alcohol is one of the worst drugs out there, but hey, it’s legal…. Go figure.
Which is all the more reason to wear your seatbelts guys. (to get back to the original topic).
Won't be much longer before this is shut down.
Britt
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
JUST BE SURE YOU ARE GOOD AND DRUNK AND WEARING YOUR SEATBELT AND HELMET WHEN YOU TAKE THE KIDS TO THE WOODSHED
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,564
Likes: 6
From: Cummins Technical Center, IN
Originally posted by t-7 firefighter
In a perfect world that might work. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Blame it on the left if you want too, but you and I both know it isn’t a leftist problem. If you believe that “old fashioned trips to the woodshed at a young age” would work then I feel you are sorely mistaken.
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
People are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it. You CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT govern morality. You cannot force your morals on someone else. Just because something seems right to you doesn’t mean it’s right for the next person. If I choose to smoke weed in my own house that I bought and paid for, by myself, with no one else around. How could you possibly care????? Do you think the storm troopers should come busting down my door because I choose to smoke a little weed. ( I don’t of course but this is just an example (had to throw that in there). Do you lay awake at night thinking about what other people are doing in their free time? Don't take it personally, I'm not just asking you but all of the other "moral" people out there. Why would you care if it did? If you don't like it then don't do it. It's as simple as that.
We don’t like it, but someone is driving drunk right now. Alcohol is one of the worst drugs out there, but hey, it’s legal…. Go figure.
Which is all the more reason to wear your seatbelts guys. (to get back to the original topic).
Won't be much longer before this is shut down.
Britt
In a perfect world that might work. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Blame it on the left if you want too, but you and I both know it isn’t a leftist problem. If you believe that “old fashioned trips to the woodshed at a young age” would work then I feel you are sorely mistaken.
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
People are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it. You CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT govern morality. You cannot force your morals on someone else. Just because something seems right to you doesn’t mean it’s right for the next person. If I choose to smoke weed in my own house that I bought and paid for, by myself, with no one else around. How could you possibly care????? Do you think the storm troopers should come busting down my door because I choose to smoke a little weed. ( I don’t of course but this is just an example (had to throw that in there). Do you lay awake at night thinking about what other people are doing in their free time? Don't take it personally, I'm not just asking you but all of the other "moral" people out there. Why would you care if it did? If you don't like it then don't do it. It's as simple as that.
We don’t like it, but someone is driving drunk right now. Alcohol is one of the worst drugs out there, but hey, it’s legal…. Go figure.
Which is all the more reason to wear your seatbelts guys. (to get back to the original topic).
Won't be much longer before this is shut down.
Britt
Also what does the child abuse of beating your daughter have to do with the proper punishment of a child via a spanking? Nothing, as far as I can tell. Then again, I've been obtuse at times. Wasn't someone talking about straw man? Scarecrow lives! Your example is a total non-sequitur.
As for governing morality, you are absolutely 100% wrong in a sense. Our government does it everyday. The SCOTUS ruled that abortion is a legally acceptable thing. How is THIS not a moral position? How is this NOT legislating morality?
The truth is that EVERY law carries with it an element of morality. In fact, one definition of politics is "the authoritative allocation of values in a society" (thanks, Professor Dahl). Thus, our government is elected in part to authoritatively allocate VALUES in our society. We elect people that we hope reflect OUR values in hopes that they will become the values of the society at large.
You said:
People are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it
But be careful in attempting to draw conclusions from this, because the purpose of a law is NOT to control people's actions, but rather to say that WE as a society, take a moral stance on a certain action. In essence, it's a stamp of approval or disapproval.
We have laws against murder, rape, robbery, and arson. Does this mean that these things never happen? OF COURSE NOT!! So, the purpose of a law is NOT to prevent a certain action or to control a person's behavior. Besides, how many people make decisions based on whether or not something is legal? Do you decide NOT to kill someone only because it's illegal? Of course not. How about the speed you drive? Do you ALWAYS obey the speed limit? If not, can you say that you believe 100% in the rule of law?
So it's clear that the purpose of law is NOT to control people's behavior, but rather
1) To reflect the moral position of society at large
2) Deter certain kinds of conduct deemed at odds with those positions
3) Hold accountable those who choose certain conduct despite deterrence
While I am generally a Libertarian kind of guy (and thus sympathetic to Edwin's post), there are limits to that liberty-- it's not absolute.
And finally, your implied endorsement of moral relativism needs its own posts, as it is sufficiently absurd to require much more discussion and debunking.
So, when we pass laws requiring people to wear seatbelts, it is because we are 1) making a statement about seatbelt use, and 2) giving that statement some teeth.
Rebuttals are welcome.
Justin
DTR's Self Appointed Beer Advisor
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
From: On my way to Hell... Need a lift?
Very good post Justin.
While I think most people take what I post with a grain of salt you do bring up some good points.
1. As far as Tom’s post goes, I was more or less being facetious. I know he wasn’t talking about beating your child but the example seemed a little absurd to me. The drug problem is never going to go away in America or any other country for that matter. While I am not a big fan of drugs I don’t see the reason to keep them illegal. But to blame it on the left wing is just plain crazy. Now as most of you know I am about as far left as you can get and I know that 99% of the DTR members are right to far right. But it is not a left or right wing problem. It is just a part of reality.
I won’t even think about getting into the abortion argument with you.
Let me put it to you this way. “I’m against ANY law that takes rights away from American citizens” (minus rape or murder or any other action that causes harm to another). SIMPLE AS THAT!
2. When I said people are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it that is exactly what I meant. Once again I’m not talking about anything that harms another (as most of you are able to comprehend). What I choose to do in my on house by myself is MY business. NOT anyone else’s. I don’t know how to make it any more clear. Justin… I don’t tell you what you can or can’t do. I’m pretty sure you would resent me telling you that you can’t do something that I might find offensive. Why should “I” be able to tell you that you can or can’t do something that you want to do that isn’t harming anyone else???? RustyJC would you like “ME” telling you what you can or can’t do? I didn’t think so. I would just like everyone to keep their morals to themselves.
I guess what I’m getting at is this. As long as you are not causing harm to another (and this is a very big point) HOW could anyone possibly care what someone else does in his or her spare time? If someone is not causing anyone harm then YOU are trying to force YOUR morals on someone else just because YOU don’t agree with their actions. If YOU are causing harm to someone else then society at large has a right to object. It doesn’t get any simpler then that.
Just my opinion.
Oh yeah... by the way, wear your seatbelts!!!!
Britt
While I think most people take what I post with a grain of salt you do bring up some good points.
1. As far as Tom’s post goes, I was more or less being facetious. I know he wasn’t talking about beating your child but the example seemed a little absurd to me. The drug problem is never going to go away in America or any other country for that matter. While I am not a big fan of drugs I don’t see the reason to keep them illegal. But to blame it on the left wing is just plain crazy. Now as most of you know I am about as far left as you can get and I know that 99% of the DTR members are right to far right. But it is not a left or right wing problem. It is just a part of reality.
I won’t even think about getting into the abortion argument with you.
Let me put it to you this way. “I’m against ANY law that takes rights away from American citizens” (minus rape or murder or any other action that causes harm to another). SIMPLE AS THAT!
2. When I said people are going to do what they want to do when they want to do it that is exactly what I meant. Once again I’m not talking about anything that harms another (as most of you are able to comprehend). What I choose to do in my on house by myself is MY business. NOT anyone else’s. I don’t know how to make it any more clear. Justin… I don’t tell you what you can or can’t do. I’m pretty sure you would resent me telling you that you can’t do something that I might find offensive. Why should “I” be able to tell you that you can or can’t do something that you want to do that isn’t harming anyone else???? RustyJC would you like “ME” telling you what you can or can’t do? I didn’t think so. I would just like everyone to keep their morals to themselves.
I guess what I’m getting at is this. As long as you are not causing harm to another (and this is a very big point) HOW could anyone possibly care what someone else does in his or her spare time? If someone is not causing anyone harm then YOU are trying to force YOUR morals on someone else just because YOU don’t agree with their actions. If YOU are causing harm to someone else then society at large has a right to object. It doesn’t get any simpler then that.
Just my opinion.
Oh yeah... by the way, wear your seatbelts!!!!
Britt
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 1,063
From: Commerce, OK
Originally posted by HOHN
Britt, I think you are misreading what Tom is meaning. He's simply saying that if kids were more disciplined (not necessarily punishment per se), then drug use would be less of a problem.
Also what does the child abuse of beating your daughter have to do with the proper punishment of a child via a spanking? Nothing, as far as I can tell. Then again, I've been obtuse at times. Wasn't someone talking about straw man? Scarecrow lives! Your example is a total non-sequitur.
As for governing morality, you are absolutely 100% wrong in a sense. Our government does it everyday. The SCOTUS ruled that abortion is a legally acceptable thing. How is THIS not a moral position? How is this NOT legislating morality?
The truth is that EVERY law carries with it an element of morality. In fact, one definition of politics is "the authoritative allocation of values in a society" (thanks, Professor Dahl). Thus, our government is elected in part to authoritatively allocate VALUES in our society. We elect people that we hope reflect OUR values in hopes that they will become the values of the society at large.
You said:
Now, do you mean that society cannot CONTROL a person's actions? I think this is true. Ultimately, only thing controls a persons actions- their own will.
But be careful in attempting to draw conclusions from this, because the purpose of a law is NOT to control people's actions, but rather to say that WE as a society, take a moral stance on a certain action. In essence, it's a stamp of approval or disapproval.
We have laws against murder, rape, robbery, and arson. Does this mean that these things never happen? OF COURSE NOT!! So, the purpose of a law is NOT to prevent a certain action or to control a person's behavior. Besides, how many people make decisions based on whether or not something is legal? Do you decide NOT to kill someone only because it's illegal? Of course not. How about the speed you drive? Do you ALWAYS obey the speed limit? If not, can you say that you believe 100% in the rule of law?
So it's clear that the purpose of law is NOT to control people's behavior, but rather
1) To reflect the moral position of society at large
2) Deter certain kinds of conduct deemed at odds with those positions
3) Hold accountable those who choose certain conduct despite deterrence
While I am generally a Libertarian kind of guy (and thus sympathetic to Edwin's post), there are limits to that liberty-- it's not absolute.
And finally, your implied endorsement of moral relativism needs its own posts, as it is sufficiently absurd to require much more discussion and debunking.
So, when we pass laws requiring people to wear seatbelts, it is because we are 1) making a statement about seatbelt use, and 2) giving that statement some teeth.
Rebuttals are welcome.
Justin
Britt, I think you are misreading what Tom is meaning. He's simply saying that if kids were more disciplined (not necessarily punishment per se), then drug use would be less of a problem.
Also what does the child abuse of beating your daughter have to do with the proper punishment of a child via a spanking? Nothing, as far as I can tell. Then again, I've been obtuse at times. Wasn't someone talking about straw man? Scarecrow lives! Your example is a total non-sequitur.
As for governing morality, you are absolutely 100% wrong in a sense. Our government does it everyday. The SCOTUS ruled that abortion is a legally acceptable thing. How is THIS not a moral position? How is this NOT legislating morality?
The truth is that EVERY law carries with it an element of morality. In fact, one definition of politics is "the authoritative allocation of values in a society" (thanks, Professor Dahl). Thus, our government is elected in part to authoritatively allocate VALUES in our society. We elect people that we hope reflect OUR values in hopes that they will become the values of the society at large.
You said:
Now, do you mean that society cannot CONTROL a person's actions? I think this is true. Ultimately, only thing controls a persons actions- their own will.
But be careful in attempting to draw conclusions from this, because the purpose of a law is NOT to control people's actions, but rather to say that WE as a society, take a moral stance on a certain action. In essence, it's a stamp of approval or disapproval.
We have laws against murder, rape, robbery, and arson. Does this mean that these things never happen? OF COURSE NOT!! So, the purpose of a law is NOT to prevent a certain action or to control a person's behavior. Besides, how many people make decisions based on whether or not something is legal? Do you decide NOT to kill someone only because it's illegal? Of course not. How about the speed you drive? Do you ALWAYS obey the speed limit? If not, can you say that you believe 100% in the rule of law?
So it's clear that the purpose of law is NOT to control people's behavior, but rather
1) To reflect the moral position of society at large
2) Deter certain kinds of conduct deemed at odds with those positions
3) Hold accountable those who choose certain conduct despite deterrence
While I am generally a Libertarian kind of guy (and thus sympathetic to Edwin's post), there are limits to that liberty-- it's not absolute.
And finally, your implied endorsement of moral relativism needs its own posts, as it is sufficiently absurd to require much more discussion and debunking.
So, when we pass laws requiring people to wear seatbelts, it is because we are 1) making a statement about seatbelt use, and 2) giving that statement some teeth.
Rebuttals are welcome.
Justin
Libertarians hold in general that each individual (there are NO collective rights hence democracy is violative of individual sovereignty) has the right to do whatever he wishes as long as so doing does not infringe on the equal right or property of any other individual, nor may violence, force, threat of force or fraud be employed to acheve any individual or collective goal.
To a Libertarian, what is moral is between him and his God(s) and what is legal is between him and other sovereign individuals. The purpose of government, if government is even necessary is to secure the rights of the individual from infringement by others and to remedy in the courts any such infringement.
Therefore, if I choose to do something that causes direct harm to another, it is a crime. Murder, rape, robbery and fraud are examples of such direct harm.
Things I choose to do which do not cause direct harm to others or defraud them is not a crime.
Bear in mind that in a true Libertarian society there is no collective right to medical care. There is no legislated requirements for people to have insurance nor are the terms of such insurance legislated. Roads will be built and maintained by private persons or companies on land freely purchased without the power of eminent domain.
If the owner of a road requires that customers have insurance before they use the roads then an individual must have insurance. If the insurance company requires the use of helmets or seatbelts then the insured must use them or risk having his claim denied if he is injured. Liability claims will be unaffected in most likelyhood.
If my medical insurance says claims for injuries from drug use will be denied then I run that risk also.
Of course if the parents of children are neglectful when they use drugs or alcohol then government or neighbors may take steps to remedy the situation. No Libertarian will hold that children shouldn't be protected.
There are many non-violent ways to control the behavior of others. Shunning is one, and property/community covenants are another. However such covenants are by written contract and must be freely entered into by the parties involved. There is no such thing as a democratically enacted law to force people to conform to some "moral" code.
I could go on and on but hopefully those who are unfamilliar with Libertarianism will get the idea.
In Liberty
Edwin
Thats MR Hoss to you buddy!
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,759
Likes: 3
From: Central Texas
Originally posted by herb
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
JUST BE SURE YOU ARE GOOD AND DRUNK AND WEARING YOUR SEATBELT AND HELMET WHEN YOU TAKE THE KIDS TO THE WOODSHED
So judging by your rational, if I beat my daughter that will take care of the drug problem in America? Sweet! I guess if I beat my daughter she will think twice about getting bad grades in school, speeding, and not making the cheerleading squad also.
JUST BE SURE YOU ARE GOOD AND DRUNK AND WEARING YOUR SEATBELT AND HELMET WHEN YOU TAKE THE KIDS TO THE WOODSHED
Seatbelts.....yeah......be sure you teach your kids to wear seatbelts.
