reply to post by nixie_nox
I already explained that you have a right to travel, you have a right to own a car, but how you operate on a road is what is
these two things are not the same.
and the operation of the transportation of the day is my unregulated right.
should i choose to utilize that transportation to engage in commercial activities while upon the roadways is subject to regulation. however, it is
the only one.
if you are not conducting business on the roadway, this "regulation" does not apply to you unless you voluntarily
agree to it, plain and
Everyone has a right to travel uninhibited.
exactly, so why are you implying that my right to travel utilizing the method of the day
is or should be limited ??
that no one's right to travel can inhibit someone else's right to travel.
no one on this thread said any such thing, including the
what IFs are for ppl who choose to engage in fantasy.
i prefer the reality of dealing with being duped by the State/Fed government policy of extortion, fraudulent contracting, thievery, perpetual unlawful
acts and the correction of them.
wrong again, i operated such equipment long before i was "old enough" to garner a license.
try growing up around farmland ... many kids operate BIG machinery long before they drive under fraudulent contracting with the State.
nope, i respect my ability and the lives of others, hence, i don't drink and drive = -0- DWI, DUI or any such infraction. i know plenty who have as
they've had me drive for them.
who said driving = the right to put other ppls lives or property at risk?
are you for real ??
ppl, property, cars, planes, trains, bicycles ... you name it ... start each day with all the same risk as they carried the day before, this, over
time, has never changed.
it was a horrible accident
, IF you choose to see it that way.
imho, the MT driver had no business being behind the wheel, period.
(it's been awhile but if memory serves, he ran a stop sign and broad-sided her)
however, no law or application of punishment will change that simple fact or will it return my cousin to life.
they each accepted the risk of getting behind the wheel.
each of those decisions came with consequence, however, neither should be deprived of their right to travel.
do you know how many truck drivers falsify those "records" ??
i do and it's quite a few.
while he did remove her right to life --> why then is his punishment anything less ??
no, the seatbelt killed her ... she likely would have survived the impact without the seatbelt engaged.
(so says the drs who treated her)
you can perceive it any way you desire, but this is the truth of the matter.
again, it wasn't a semi-truck, it was a mac (there is a difference)
had she not been using the equipment, she likely would have survived
you are mistaken as i've been there and done that.
try preaching to someone who hasn't.
(besides, i like to see an insurance company prove that I removed them, especially on a used car)
no, it's just that some of us have been doing this much longer than you.
some of us believe in liberty.
some of us believe in unalienable rights as guaranteed by our Constitution.
and some of us, like you, have yet to understand any of it.
Lets talk about rights.
I was sitting still when I was rearended by a car going over 50pmh, it was a straight hit since the driver never saw me since he was texting.
so, which of these rights is a problem ??
you driving or the offending driver driving ??
careless driving is a punishable offense, yet ppl do it all the time.
accidents via neglectful driver actions happen frequently, no law prevents it.
look, you accept the risk of bodily injury as soon as you enter the car.
this is an absolute. no one is forcing you to drive or ride in one.
the consequences of said action (driving) are not disputable as they often occur.
i am sorry to hear about your situation and i do hope you're on the road to recovery.
however, as i've certainly experienced more than my fair share of similar incidents, it is a risk we accept when we decide to operate an automobile.
there is no law that can or is intended to mitigate that risk.
your displaced anger is seriously mis-directed.
it is not his "right" that upsets you, but his disregard for you while exercising his right.
and for that, we already have a system of punishment