It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I don't believe for a second you are a stupid person, so your twisted reasoning is indicative of something far worse, and this makes you a dangerous man, clearly looking to rule over other people instead of respect their rights. This is your most egregious failure.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
You certainly have the right to free travel, doesn't mean that you have the right to drive a car. After all, you have your feet.
What should the government do? Give you a free car? Perhaps hire drivers for everyone?
As for the larger argument, this idea about anarchy being the bees knees, it's all bull.
So someone comes in and kills you, your families only recourse is to sue them, but without police to arrest those people, how in the HELL are you going to get them to a court room in order to face the trial?
What should the government do? Give you a free car? Perhaps hire drivers for everyone?
Originally posted by Geeky_Bubbe
reply to post by autowrench
Question for ya:
Who, in your utopia, builds the roads, bridges, tunnels, overpasses, etc? Who maintains them? Who sweeps up the body parts from the roadways in this unregulated world of yours?
OK, I lied, more than one question is was.
Did it ever occur to anyone against licensing that the primary reason you can be issued a traffic ticket and sent on your way is that the officer can reasonably presume that the Driver's License you present is in fact *you*. Without this presumptive identification mechanism all people issued "a ticket" would have to be hauled into jail to be fingerprinted, "run through the system," then cash bond demanded.
There was a day in this country when you had to pay the officer then and there for your traffic violation as a "bond" against guarantee to appear in court. With positive ID, or presumptively so, we no longer have to cough up all that cash. Our name is literally our bond at that point.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
While the constitution protects a person's right to pursue happiness, it does not guarantee that happiness.
So, you have still failed to show how driving a car is a fundamental right.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
Originally posted by Geeky_Bubbe
reply to post by autowrench
Who sweeps up the body parts from the roadways in this unregulated world of yours?
Originally posted by Grossac
Obviously, by the video, you see that you ARE allowed to drive without a license if you know your rights and are prepared. The guy in questions knew his rights and answered the questions without falling into a trap.
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Ah OK, so he's not talking about the Constitution that actually counts and matter's in this discussion. Thanks for the clarification!
Originally posted by Geeky_Bubbe
reply to post by autowrench
Question for ya:
Who, in your utopia, builds the roads, bridges, tunnels, overpasses, etc? Who maintains them? Who sweeps up the body parts from the roadways in this unregulated world of yours?
OK, I lied, more than one question is was.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by sirnex
He is responding the Article I Section 1 of the California Constitution I posted earlier:
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
Main Entry: hap·pi·ness
Pronunciation: \ˈha-pē-nəs\
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 obsolete : good fortune : prosperity
2 a : a state of well-being and contentment : joy
b : a pleasurable or satisfying experience
3 : felicity, aptness
1. Main Entry: pur·sue
Pronunciation: \pər-ˈsü, -ˈsyü\
Function: verb Inflected Form(s): pur·sued; pur·su·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French pursure, pursiure, from Latin prosequi, from pro- forward + sequi to follow — more at pro-, sue
Date: 14th century
transitive verb
1 : to follow in order to overtake, capture, kill, or defeat
2 : to find or employ measures to obtain or accomplish : seek
3 : to proceed along
4 a : to engage in b : to follow up or proceed with
5 : to continue to afflict : haunt
6 : 2chase 1c
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Well, the fact that I don't have a license or a car and I seem to be doing ok makes y'alls entire point invalid.
The people arguing for this freeman anarchy society somehow want to what they want when they want and how they want with no repercussions if what they want to do violates the rights of others.
The idea that you can just go around without a state issued identification, and somehow you are going to be honest with the "sheriff" when you get busted speeding is completely bogus.
You all are relying on the honor system for this entire anarchic society of yours and it won't work.
So let's put it this way, you get pulled over for doing 97 in a 25 mph zone, the cop issues you a citation for that infraction of the societies rules, you give him the name of your buddy, now your buddy is liable for your crime, because in your freeman society, you don't have to carry any form of identification whatsoever and the cop has no choice but to just take your word for who you are.
I see poor John Smith getting into a lot of trouble for things he didn't do.
You all are relying on the honor system for this entire anarchic society of yours and it won't work.