Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: unlearner
No. Current DUI drivers are not sufficiently punished in most cases and I doubt an influx of additional offenders will result in more severe penalties.

So why not insist that DUI laws be strengthened rather than attempt an end-around by legislating in another area altogether?

Agreed, but I have yet to hear about the American Idol watchers stealing to support their habit, spreading diseases with dirty needles, or causing injuries, loss of life, etc.

Laws exist to prosecute these crimes already. Why would we need additional laws criminalizing drugs to alleviate the problems of, say, burglary? Would it matter, materially, if your house was robbed by someone who needed money to buy a Cadillac rather than to buy drugs?

"You're a nanny-stater then, not a true conservative at all."

Well I'm not a libertine if that's what you mean.

That's not what I mean. You're obviously not a libertine.

I would like to be able to live somewhere where I am not forced to bear the consequences of the irresponsible behavior of others and where the community is free to exercise its freedoms as a group.

Groups don't have freedom; individuals do. God grants rights to each individual man, woman, and child, not classes of men, women, or children. Collective rights are the realm of socialists.

422 posted on 07/07/2005 9:43:32 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies ]


To: Hemingway's Ghost
"Groups don't have freedom; individuals do. God grants rights to each individual man, woman, and child, not classes of men, women, or children. Collective rights are the realm of socialists."

There is a big difference between "classes" of people and communities. Classes are arbitrary distinctions. Communities are based on the right to associate with people of your own choosing and the ability to enter into contracts.

For example, some communities regulate the use of signs by deed restrictions. This can protect property values as well as making the areas you live and work more pleasant. Some people do not want them and are free to buy property without those restrictions.

I would even go further and say states and nations have rights. Don't we have a "collective" right to defend our nation against foreign attacks?

"So why not insist that DUI laws be strengthened rather than attempt an end-around by legislating in another area altogether? Laws exist to prosecute these crimes already. Why would we need additional laws criminalizing drugs to alleviate the problems of, say, burglary?"

I guess prevention versus punishment is the reason. I would vote today to turn power back over to local communities as long as it is across the board. Further, I think the idea that local communities can make their own decisions is the best way to unify the cause of freedom.

The pioneers of this nation had very strong, conflicting opinions about religion, morality and how government should treat these issues. But the idea of independence struck a cord of agreement because each diverse group understood that they would be able to live according to their beliefs. Without allowing local communities to set their own standards it is impossible to unify so many different persuasions. Allowing local communities to set their owns standards also encourages healthy competition. We can observe the effects of drugs, alcohol, gambling, prostitution, religious vs. secular education. When the federal and state governments take power away from communities it is more difficult to see which way works best.
424 posted on 07/07/2005 10:57:32 AM PDT by unlearner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson