Steve Kinney wrote:
Can we get a consensus that no one should be allowed to operate a motor vehicle without proof of income, That what happens in states with optional insurance regulation. You're required to produce proof of ability to compensate someone in case you crush their legs or some other stupid thing that me-firsters never consider until it's THEIR legs that get crushed.
And that this constraint should be imposed by deadly force in the event that someone persistently refuses to comply?
ROTF! The option is ME pulling out a gun and putting a bullet in your head immediately if your car threatens my life. Your choice dude. Keep extrapolating and not answering my direct question with a direct answer. The question IS:
So can we get a consensus that someone operating a 1-2 ton weapon of environmental and generally Mass Destruction, including but not limited to taking someone's life, should not only prove to 'the herd' they're capable, or at least KNOW how to operate said WMD properly (license), and have responsibility for that WMD, their personal property, evidenced (registration) for the rest of us ?
Evasion was a local 'zine by the OG Dharma Punk, but not an appropriate way to answer a legitimate question.
Now we have an "Affordable Care Act"
It can't run you over.
It's a matter of perspective. A fear based world view that imposes a constant 'need' for protection by ersatz parental figures is the consensus reality in Amerika.
The worldview in Merica, as illustrated by the responses I'm seeing is 'denial of responsibility' and a touch of sociopathy... Given that, "a constant 'need' for protection" seems prerequisite. -- RR "Freedom is the capacity to pause between stimulus and response." ~Rollo May