This is one of the best discussions and logical arguments on TH-cam. Jim, you are courageous, humble, thoughtful and logical. I hope I can meet you in person someday. Long live the NAP.
I see the logic here - but it would require a different legal change. The authority of police to take you into custody or seize your belongings (like towing your car) is based in criminal enforcement. To do so "for your own well being" becomes a constitutional issue - and a scary case of where they think the boundaries of 'your own good' may be. I don't *dis*agree with you - just saying it's not as simple as presented, and the 'solution' raises as many issues as the 'problem'.
A crime requires a Victim, leading to just compensation. Yes, this is logical. Revenge is an emotion that misleads, e.g., the desired/expected result is never what is acquired, after reflection. I was permanently disabled in 1978 by a reckless driver. My life has been shortened, years lost immediately afterward and still I suffer daily. The driver was released without punishment. After 36 years I looked her up. She divorced, then died of cancer. I was disappointed. I wanted to ask her if she knew what she did. She didn't visit me in hospital or ever communicate. Now, at 82, I realize this was not my worse loss. My only friend died after his cousin ran off the road, crashing the car in a ditch, 1954. It haunted my dreams every night for 5 years. My takeaway: I found a way to live. I overcame. Nothing else matters. I wasn't hurt by the fact that the perps didn't suffer. I didn't need revenge.
Driving w/o insurance isn't a crime either, but MADD made insurance mandatory precisely so drunk drivers could get it. Btw, you can't say you don't drink unless you *never* drink. If you drink at holidays or an occasional drink, you drink. Stop fudging. I had a friend who said she didn't drink. Then she had a beer. I'll never believe her about anything else. When I say I don't drink, it means I never, ever, drink. Lowering the blood alcohol levels won't change a thing. People who are going to drink and drive will drink and drive regardless. And a victim is anyone who has to take evasive action to avoid someone who got in the car after drinking. You don't need to get drunk for it to affect you.
MADD supports mandatory insurance for all drivers, which is insane. We have to pay for drunk drivers insurance - the very reason for mandatory insurance. Mandatory insurance doesn't stop people from driving drunk and it's no comfort for those injured or those that lost loved ones.
libertarianism is always such a disappointment. You use narrow definitions and ignorance of human nature to formulate a specious argument encouraging reckless behavior and ultimately putting innocent people at risk. You are more concerned with ideas than with real people who live in the real world. Next time I see a recommendation from you i'll immediately click three dot menu and don't recommend channel.
![[BadComedian] - Русские ЭМО СУМЕРКИ (твой личный сорт кринжа)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DO_lijyx-No/mqdefault.jpg)
This is one of the best discussions and logical arguments on TH-cam. Jim, you are courageous, humble, thoughtful and logical. I hope I can meet you in person someday. Long live the NAP.
I see the logic here - but it would require a different legal change. The authority of police to take you into custody or seize your belongings (like towing your car) is based in criminal enforcement. To do so "for your own well being" becomes a constitutional issue - and a scary case of where they think the boundaries of 'your own good' may be.
I don't *dis*agree with you - just saying it's not as simple as presented, and the 'solution' raises as many issues as the 'problem'.
Wow. It's a hard case to make, but you did it. Your personal connection to the issue is also quite moving.
Driving w/o insurance isn't a crime either.
A crime requires a Victim, leading to just compensation. Yes, this is logical.
Revenge is an emotion that misleads, e.g., the desired/expected result is never what is acquired, after reflection.
I was permanently disabled in 1978 by a reckless driver. My life has been shortened, years lost immediately afterward and still I suffer daily. The driver was released without punishment. After 36 years I looked her up. She divorced, then died of cancer. I was disappointed. I wanted to ask her if she knew what she did. She didn't visit me in hospital or ever communicate. Now, at 82, I realize this was not my worse loss. My only friend died after his cousin ran off the road, crashing the car in a ditch, 1954. It haunted my dreams every night for 5 years.
My takeaway: I found a way to live. I overcame. Nothing else matters. I wasn't hurt by the fact that the perps didn't suffer. I didn't need revenge.
Driving w/o insurance isn't a crime either, but MADD made insurance mandatory precisely so drunk drivers could get it. Btw, you can't say you don't drink unless you *never* drink. If you drink at holidays or an occasional drink, you drink. Stop fudging. I had a friend who said she didn't drink. Then she had a beer. I'll never believe her about anything else. When I say I don't drink, it means I never, ever, drink.
Lowering the blood alcohol levels won't change a thing. People who are going to drink and drive will drink and drive regardless. And a victim is anyone who has to take evasive action to avoid someone who got in the car after drinking. You don't need to get drunk for it to affect you.
This is Jim. I don't recall saying I never have a drink.
MADD actually supports prohibition
MADD supports mandatory insurance for all drivers, which is insane. We have to pay for drunk drivers insurance - the very reason for mandatory insurance. Mandatory insurance doesn't stop people from driving drunk and it's no comfort for those injured or those that lost loved ones.
libertarianism is always such a disappointment. You use narrow definitions and ignorance of human nature to formulate a specious argument encouraging reckless behavior and ultimately putting innocent people at risk. You are more concerned with ideas than with real people who live in the real world. Next time I see a recommendation from you i'll immediately click three dot menu and don't recommend channel.
So you didn't actually listen to the episode?