[CORedneck]

Sounds like socialist drivel.

Where do we get this notion that driving is a privilege ?Privileges are subject to an arbitrary whim of some moron who has authority.

How did we as a country fall down so much that we need to have government special permission to transport ourselves with a motor vehicle ? We never needed a license to ride a horse or drive/ride a stagecoach. We didn't have to get government permission to ride a horse.

It seems we are going in the direction where the laws specify that you can do anything unless there is a specific law against the act. Under socialism, you cannot do anything unless permission is granted and that is the direction we are heading towards.

You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.

[dfwgator]

Why are y'all jumping on me, I didn't make the rules, I'm just the messenger here.

There is no comparison between guns and autos. It does not require any infrastructure for you to have a gun. It does however require roads to drive, and roads are a key part of our infrastructure, which is one of the legitimate roles for government.

To say that driving is a right, the same as the right to free speech or the right to bear arms is folly.

And as for not wearing seat belts only affecting the passenger, a passenger without seat belts in an accident can become a projectile that can pose a threat to others.

Now if you extremist libertarians want it your way, I'll make a deal. You can go without wearing seat belts, if you also will agree to paying all of your medical bills out of your own pocket without causing everybody else's insurance rates to go up, should you get injured. And oh by the way, no death benefits for your survivors should you get killed, why should the rest of us pay for your stupidity?

I think you libertarians should be ok with that, right?