MASSIVE Government Overreach

1. 87

   crankaliciousposted 2 years ago

   While we're all focused on mask mandates and vaccine mandates, there's an instance of MASSIVE government overreach that nobody seems to be addressing and that's this: speed limits.
   
   Why does the government believe it has the right to tell me how fast to drive? This should be up to the individual. People are smart enough to know how fast to drive and everyone is perfectly well aware that 55mph is a safe driving speed. However, if I'm driving at night and there's nobody else on the highway, I should be able to go at whatever speed I want. The government should simply have no role in determining any speed limit.
   
   Furthermore, why does the federal government mandate car insurance? Why is it required for driving? This is another massive government overreach. I should get to decide whether or not I buy car insurance, which is very expensive.
   
   There's plenty of information out there on the benefits of driving a certain speed and on car insurance, but it should be up to me as an individual, free of government interference, whether I follow that guidance.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Government oversite is a slippery slope.  I think Wilderness made a solid point with his seat-belt anology. Does Government have the right to tell one what they "must do" to stay safe from possible harm? If one's decision hurts no one other than themself?  I actually appreciate sensible Government overreach to generally protect citizens from harm, such as law enforcement, and yes, seatbelts.
      
      In regard to the primary reason, drivers need car insurance --- because of liability,  taking responsibility, for any damage you might cause. someone else as well as yourself.  Since your vehicle has the potential to cause physical or costly material harm, you need to have insurance to cover the costs of these damages you caused someone else.  This seems fair. However, if one felt they did not need insurance due to being wealthy enough to pay damages out of pocket --- I see nothing wrong that a person is exempt from the law.  But, the Government, as a rule, blankets all under one blanket 
      
      I am stumped in regard to the speed limit, Some would be very responsible in driving a speed they felt the road conditions dictated. Others, well may not be as responsive to road conditions such as the amount of traffic, road conditions, and so on...

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         General welfare is being considered: What is good/best for all. In the case of vaccines, they are not good/best for ALL.
         
         For instance, a vaccine is not good for me.  A universally agreed-upon speed limit is.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            My comment specifically addressed Crank's subject. But I can see your anology. I have no problem with personal decision-making when it comes to putting anything into one's body. I am a nurse and respect and actually protect and advocate a patient's right to refuse any treatment or medications they feel they do not want.
            
            We all have the right to say yes or no to the vaccine. We all have the right to our own opinions in regard to vaccines.   
            
            Regarding the vaccines,  I have shared my individual thoughts as you have shared yours.  We all need to respect each other's decisions.
            
            I truly see where you are coming from in regard to the vaccine even if I don't agree with it.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               yes.

               replyreport
            2. 87

               crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, I don't think we need to respect each other's decisions when it comes to decisions that impact other people. What happens when your decision kills somebody?
               
               Not taking the vaccine is like driving drunk. It's all fine until you smash into a family of 4 and kill them all.
               
               If you don't want to take the Trump vaccine, fine. But you shouldn't be able to fly. You may not be able to continue working for the company who employs you. You may not be able to enter some stores. Insurance companies shouldn't have to insure you.

               replyreport
               1. 79

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I choose to wear masks at all times in public, vaccinated or not, and let those without vaccination or masks choose to take their chances. That as far as my understanding of "free choice" will allow.

                  replyreport
               2. 75

                  Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I respect to wear a mask temporary for others to feel comfortable, yet who is really comfortable wearing a mask.
                  
                  Although mandating passports and all other human rights and contitusional law is out right criminal and treason.

                  replyreport
      2. 94

         wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         I recall a friend that got a ticket for 160 mph on a freeway in Oregon long ago.  He beat it in court - the road was empty, it was in good condition and my car is made to do that speed (a corvette).  He won.
         
         But that was in Oregon, where there was a "basic speed limit" 50 years ago which was basically "what conditions allow".  It was designed to allow cops to limit speed under poor condition but also worked the other way.

         replyreport
   2. 75

      Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      State and centralized bankers. are untouchable to the point of printing money and stealing your money or home.
      They are the only true God daily.
      They can reach and shut your light out and make it look like an accident.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Live to Learnposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Since you’ve come out in favor of the unvaccinated losing their health insurance, this thread surprised me. I’d think you’d be in favor of a speeder losing their license for life.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Your insurance premiums go up when you get a speeding ticket because the insurance company figures you are at greater risk of having an accident. Perhaps you see a similarity here?

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            That's small stuff and just a drop in the bucket of money or deaths overall.  Covid handling is far more deadlier than any traffic ticket. Covid plandemic effects every human being on the planet on every level.
            
            Shows most people major in Minor stuff.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Keep up the good work. Never let up.

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Lol. I think I have to catch on my survival work now.

                  replyreport
                  1. 77

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     our own survival.
                     
                     
                     PS Do you still swim? I recently lived by the beach for fourteen months and swam in 70 degree water as often as I could. Talk about feeling healthy!

                     replyreport
                     1. 75

                        Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        You know I'm an expert on beaches as a sandsculptor.
                        Nova Scotia has the most beautiful beaches I've seen in the world. Daughter swims in them in the winter, it has the warmest water North of Virginia.
                        
                        Will be coaching a master swim team once the Covid has been decided. Pool had been closed for many months.

                        replyreport
                        1. 77

                           Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           

                           replyreport
   4. 90

      Kyler J Falkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Are logical fallacies like false equivalence acceptable all of a sudden, and I missed the memo?

      replyreport
2. 86

   Valeantposted 2 years ago

   And how about those seat belts?  If I want to be thrown through my windshield or ejected from my car after I roll it, that should my right.  The government should have no say in trying to save my life during an accident.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, I agree with this one - going through the windshield in a rollover does not affect anyone else, and govt. needs to allow ME to control the risks I choose to take with my own life.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, I think I may agree as well. Although using a seat belt clearly helps prevent death, not using one doesn't hurt anyone else, though one might argue forcing its use has so many positive outcomes that the implications to personal freedoms might be worth it.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Well not wearing seat belt can hurt others, do not more serious injuries in auto accidents occur to drivers and passengers without seat belts?
            
            Greater mortality and more serious injuries have to affect my insurance premiums on my policy that the government also mandate that I obtain.
            
            Once you get behind the wheel and traverse over public property, your prerogatives are justfiably limited.

            replyreport
      2. 75

         Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         On personal liberty: “Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            While I agree with the sentiment, it is very poorly expressed.
            
            Nature, in all its glory, presents just one liberty: to eat or be eaten.  To take whatever you have the power to take, whether it is a home or another life.  Nothing else.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Those kinds of ideas are contrary to a civilized and peaceful society. Human beings are supposed to be possessed with the power of reason realizing that such philosophies always fail beyond the short run.

               replyreport
            2. 75

               Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Wild
               
               I prefer Thomas Jefferson quote.
               
               LoL

               replyreport
   2. 87

      crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed. Another good example of MASSIVE government overreach.

      replyreport
      1. 75

         Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         This is all small stuff laws.
         Messing with human organs and freedom choices is serious criminal.
         
         Why do most sweat the small stuff and then when something comes along vitally human life threatening they give it all up for billionaires terrorism again. Same with the nasty flu plandemic.

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Only let Government handle the small stuff, be the king or queen of your own domain or loose it all to slavery again that was in the US for 400 years.

            replyreport
3. 94

   wildernessposted 2 years ago

   I'll add the requirements for motorcycle helmets, much for the same reasons.
   
   I would also add the denial of my right to have a septic tank and field rather than hooking up to city sewer; if my biological refuse contaminates my neighbor's yard he should move away from the area, not deny me the right to dump it into my own yard.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent example of MASSIVE government overreach.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         It was actually meant as sarcasm.  There are very good, and sufficient, reasons to deny septic permits in subdivisions or other areas with homes close together.  Not only do they not work properly but they also really do contaminate any ground water with human waste; a very dangerous proposition for anyone outside in those yards including children playing there.
         
         (I took the OP about speed limits and car insurance much the same: sarcasm, for neither is about protecting the driver.  It is the OTHER drivers that are protected, not the one the law is applied to.  Same for septic fields)

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I knew that your example was one in sarcasm, Wilderness.

            replyreport
         2. 87

            crankaliciousposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I understand.

            replyreport
4. 77

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   General welfare is different than universal welfare. Lol!
   
   The former is good for all, the latter  ... not so much.

   replyreport