Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay? (Read 3393 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43033
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #50 - Dec 31st, 2018 at 6:17am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 30th, 2018 at 6:06pm:
The odd thing is that I'm the only one on this forum who isn't pursuing the libertarian philosophy out of self-benefit.

I've never personally felt there should be less regulations.
I think a limited government that protects everyone's rights and lives and property equally is good for everybody.

Yes, we know you like lots of rules and regulations.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9810
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #51 - Dec 31st, 2018 at 7:09pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Dec 31st, 2018 at 6:17am:
I think a limited government that protects everyone's rights and lives and property equally is good for everybody.


99% of people (who aren't libertarians) disagree.

1% is not everybody.

And no, you don't get to judge what's best for someone else. They do.

You do, however, get to judge what is right, regardless of what 99% of people think and regardless of what's good for them.

And you have made that judgement.

And you're correct.

Jeff wrote on Dec 31st, 2018 at 6:17am:
Yes, we know you like lots of rules and regulations.


Wrong. I don't. I just don't care.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43033
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #52 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 9:41am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 31st, 2018 at 7:09pm:
And no, you don't get to judge what's best for someone else. They do.

That's exactly the idea behind a limited government that protects people's lives, liberty and property and otherwise leaves them alone to make their own judgements.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #53 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 12:56pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 24th, 2014 at 4:04pm:
I've seen and known my share of drunk drivers. Some of them make a point I can't call entirely worthless: "I'm a better driver drunk than a lot of people are sober."

Those sober bad drivers get to be on the road, so why not the drunk bad ones? The only case to say no would be the case of unnecessary risk. (And this bit is just my opinion; I would like to know what the libertarian one is.) Since society has determined that the risk of being on the road is necessary, so that people can get to their jobs for one, the risk can be taken, but only in the least risky manner possible. If the sober bad driver doing his very best causes an accident, then that is unfortunate (and of course he ought to pay damages) but it was necessary that he have the right to drive a car. It was not necessary, on the other hand, for the drunk bad driver to consume alcohol before he decided to drive his car. Same level of ability, same risk... one is simply unnecessary.

What I'm considering for the libertarian case is if gambling with another man's money - even if you don't happen to lose - is a good analogy. Because, when getting on the road drunk, a person takes a deliberate and unnecessary risk with the lives and property of others. You could also claim that in getting on the road, the people being risked by the drunk driving of others must know and accept that there might be drunk (or bad) drivers on the road, so they are responsible for that risk themselves.

I'm curious what libertarians think about it.


People ceded the power to government to build roads.  With that goes regulating their use.  Such as setting alcohol limits.  You can argue your views what laws should be in place, but it's not a "libertarian" issue
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #54 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 12:58pm
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Aug 24th, 2014 at 4:09pm:
There is no all-encapsulating solution to eliminate risk in any situation. But to minimize risks, libertarianism can and would do wonders over an involuntary centralized system.

Strictly from an objective libertarian standpoint, the NAP also explains this nicely. How it could work to enforce recklessness, but where people get lost, is how it would work. Would =/= could.


As my own individual, my views are my own. Drunk driving is irresponsible. Solutions from a different but compatible discourse include allowing more market driven solutions to reduce risks.


NAP is anarchy, not small government libertarian.  In fact most anarchists don't believe in it either, just effective super pacifists.  I say "effective" because technically NAP isn't pacifism, but it is effectively since you can only commit violence under direct threat.  Obviously if you have superior power, they won't attack you.

NAP is a stupid idea created by extremists and parroted by people who don't really understand it.
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9810
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #55 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 3:50pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 12:56pm:
People ceded the power to government to build roads.  With that goes regulating their use.  Such as setting alcohol limits.  You can argue your views what laws should be in place, but it's not a "libertarian" issue


Well +1 for consistency. (To you that is.)

But isn't it interesting that the consensus goes the other way here than it does in the thread about mandatory insurance?

Here, the consensus is let people drink and drive - it's a negligence issue. Punish them if they hurt someone, and when they hurt someone. Not before.

I mean, that's a great solution. In a libertarian world, they have a job, otherwise they couldn't stay alive, so garnish their wages 'til it's paid up.

But somehow, when there's an easy buck to be made by some company, letting people do the negligent thing (driving without insurance) and punishing them if and when they cause harm is no longer the consensus. Then, you must force them to buy a product to insulate against that harm.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #56 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:20pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 3:50pm:
Well +1 for consistency. (To you that is.)

But isn't it interesting that the consensus goes the other way here than it does in the thread about mandatory insurance?

Here, the consensus is let people drink and drive - it's a negligence issue. Punish them if they hurt someone, and when they hurt someone. Not before.

I mean, that's a great solution. In a libertarian world, they have a job, otherwise they couldn't stay alive, so garnish their wages 'til it's paid up.

But somehow, when there's an easy buck to be made by some company, letting people do the negligent thing (driving without insurance) and punishing them if and when they cause harm is no longer the consensus. Then, you must force them to buy a product to insulate against that harm.


Yes, there are a lot of double standards out there.  But I am consistent that they are government roads built with the consent of the governed to do so.  We also consent to them being regulated.  To argue that government can do some things to regulate them (e.g., licenses, automobile standards) and not others is random and arbitrary.  From a libertarian perspective, government can regulate them or it can't.  I say it can. 

Only an anarchist can disagree with consistency, but they don't acknowledge the government right to build the roads in the first place
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43033
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #57 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:32pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 12:58pm:
NAP is anarchy...

Only if you interpret it to say that self defense and punishing crime is prohibited by it. They are not...

Why to you think a principle of not initiating aggression is "anarchy"?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43033
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #58 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:34pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 3:50pm:
Well +1 for consistency. (To you that is.)

But isn't it interesting that the consensus goes the other way here than it does in the thread about mandatory insurance?

Here, the consensus is let people drink and drive - it's a negligence issue. Punish them if they hurt someone, and when they hurt someone. Not before.

You didn't notice me talking about erratic driving and reckless endangerment?

Get real lizard.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5749
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #59 - Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:35pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 3:50pm:
Well +1 for consistency. (To you that is.)

But isn't it interesting that the consensus goes the other way here than it does in the thread about mandatory insurance?


Good point!

Did you resurrect the mandatory insurance thread just to catch "libertarians" being inconsistent?  If so, well done.

People take a huge risk to themselves when they drive drunk.  They could die in a fiery crash or they could run over a pack of girl scouts and live with that for the rest of their lives.  If they're not afraid of those consequences, why would they fear a five thousand dollar fine and a court-ordered breathalyzer attached to their car?

Here, the consensus is let people drink and drive - it's a negligence issue. Punish them if they hurt someone, and when they hurt someone. Not before.

Quote:
I mean, that's a great solution. In a libertarian world, they have a job, otherwise they couldn't stay alive, so garnish their wages 'til it's paid up.

But somehow, when there's an easy buck to be made by some company, letting people do the negligent thing (driving without insurance) and punishing them if and when they cause harm is no longer the consensus. Then, you must force them to buy a product to insulate against that harm.



  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy