If it's anything like my sister's bmw, you'll definitely need extra time to "go on". All I'll add is it's been a mechanical disaster.

Ok, I've probably said too much... :ugh2:

Like any other German/Japanese twin car. You get rid of it before the warranty is up.

Another day, another nickle reps. :tiphat:

:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:

sureeee

:happydance::happydance:

one word... iconic.:tiphat:

be strong dude.:tup:

BoneZ my friend :hello:

fify

Be stronger then you will ever be.

Freedom of movement is an unenumerated right in our constitution. The POV is simply the latest tool, (replaced the horse, or walking), to achieve that. So, yes, driving one’s POV IS a right when viewed in this context.

HOWEVER, just like all personal rights, freedoms and liberties enshrined in our constitution and bill of rights, no one person’s rights trump another’s. Hence the need for common sense regulations that maximize individual freedoms while respecting others.

The problem with this techno centric heavy handed government approach is that it removes one’s freedom of choice. Only being able to choose one option, in this case, to drive exactly the speed limit, IS an infringement on our rights. If someone chooses to be irresponsible, there are already laws and regs to deal with and punish you, and it’s a sliding scale based on how badly you violate the law, makes sense and is fair. There is NO freedom when your only choice is to comply. But, that means accepting a certain level of risk, which is apparently getting harder and harder for people to do.

With regards to firearms, it’s the same basic idea. The thing is ANYONE, at any given time under the right, (or in this case), wrong circumstances, can snap and do something violent. The chronically mentally ill, or psychiatrically disabled committing mass shootings is pretty rare, most of the shootings in this country are done by either criminals committing a crime, or people with extremist views or anger management issues- non of that would qualify as mentally ill and non of that is going to create a medical red flag. The truth is that the vast majority of mentally ill are at something like 10 times more likely to be the victims of violence including gun violence, mostly at the hands of law enforcement due to the fact this country has no real handle on how to respect disabled people and nonviolently deescalate crises situations when they arise.

Should we then ban firearms or restrict them into oblivion? How could we possibly ever know when someone is getting “too extremist” in their views or angry that the government needs to PREEMPTIVELY step in. That’s the rub, we can always point to someone AFTER the fact and say, yeah, they became temporarily unstable due to xyorz, but getting it right beforehand without infringing on EVERYONE’s liberty is pretty tough.


Getting back to driving privileges…

When someone like spooler posts a vid of his car blasting down a deserted back road clearly meeting the legal definition of reckless driving, he has made a choice to violate the law, but in a “responsible” manner taking into account traffic , road conditions etc.

The problem is if you stop idiots doing street racing or stupidity where they are violating the law “irresponsibility” by way of govt overreach and control of one’s POV like in rusty’s posted vid, it also stops the spooler(s) as well. Remember, in the eyes of the law, what spooler is doing is no more legal or illegal than the irresponsible dudes on crowded streets.

If, god forbid, there was a freak accident in the deserted road scenario, do you think the law would care that you were being “responsible” in your law breaking?

I agree hole heartedly. Those “public safety” commercials really got my blood 🩸 boiling bc of exactly what you just said. Unfortunately, this is the society that we live in now apparently. :shakes head:

If everyone could just be more of a moderate/realist libertarian like yours truly :icon17:, then this country would be a whole lot less angry and extremist and maybe we could actually start dealing with the very real challenges we face in a common sense way using science and logic while always respecting our constitutional freedoms. Wow, what a fvcking radical idea. :icon14:

If we humans truly have free will, then we have/get to choose to do good or do evil.

It’s not being or doing good if you have no choice or are forced into it.

If we truly embrace freedom and free will, then we accept that the very same things/ideals that lead to happiness and success, liberty etc, are also used to give some folks the ability to hurt or harm others. We can’t have it both ways.

Wasn’t it Ben Franklin who said something along the lines of “those who choose safety and security over freedom and liberty deserve neither”.

It’s a balancing act that all of us have to navigate in our personal lives as well as what we accept in society as a whole.

I’m going to play devils advocate here, not bc I disagree completely with your sentiment, but bc imo it’s not a very realistic fix and actually may create new unforeseen problems.

Term limits, in theory and in some cases are good but conversely, it’s also good to have some well experienced folks around who know how the sausage gets made and how the cogs in the machine run.

A good option again in my opinion, would be keep the 2 term presidential limit, institute a 3 consecutive term limit on the house (6 years), then a minimum of one 2 year term away with a total of an additional 3 terms possible. Total of 12 years maximum and critically, NO retirement pension, this is a temporary public service like jury duty.

For the senate, this is where the career politicians can go, that way you get a better balance of old and new ideas/people. However, 30 years total should be mandatory retirement age here, but a pension is appropriate since it’s a full career of service.

Regarding bureaucrats, it’s low hanging fruit to hate on, but career civil service or military is what gives us competence and breath of experience. Maintaining accountability for all those folks so they can’t become or get away with the stereotypical lazy incompetent bureaucrat is a better answer.

You said the entire federal govt can :gtfo2:

How can we maintain superpower status and compete with the EU, China, India, or Russia? This is the 21st century, a weak federal government would be the end of the USA and all the benefits we knowingly and unknowingly have, both security and economical wise.

A federal government modeled after the 17th or 18th, or 19th century can’t cut it in the 21st century. The fantasy of a man living off the grid not paying taxes, unbeknownst to the govt with acres of land and solitude is dead and has been for a long time now.

It’s better to focus on a more realistic goal of simply improving govt transparency, oversight and accountability. And making a goal to only pass and keep laws that are necessary and the least amount possible.

(See why I call myself a realist or moderate libertarian? :).

Idealism gets butts off seats but it rarely actually accomplishes anything long term. Nothing I posted above is blood pressure raising or radical or controversial, but imo it would be effective and is more realistic than, “throw all the bums out, Fvck foggy bottom”.

T-150 :ugh:

My pool is overflowing with rain water. This is going to screw up my water chemistry. :shakes head: