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 ... 6 7 [8]  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay? (Read 2456 times)
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4665
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #70 - Jan 2nd, 2019 at 9:12am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:55pm:
I oppose mandatory insurance and approve of people being arrested for erratic driving, drunk or whatever.

You think I'm being inconsistent?


So, you don't support laws that ban driving correctly and safely but with blood alcohol over an arbitrary limit?

In other words, do you only oppose the erratic driving or do you support arresting people who drive home from a bar after drinking several shots, even if they were driving perfectly safely?

I'm guessing that if a police officer pulled someone over at 2:10 AM for "changing lanes without signaling" or too much window tint, coerced them to take a breathalyzer, and hauled them to jail, you say, "Yay government!"

  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 37015
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #71 - Jan 2nd, 2019 at 1:59pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 9:12am:
In other words, do you only oppose the erratic driving or do you support arresting people who drive home from a bar after drinking several shots, even if they were driving perfectly safely?
I've lived in states where it was legal to drink while you were driving and I often had a beer on my way home... I see no reason to make that illegal. I do see some sense in arbitrary limits on blood alcohol because there are people who can drive quite well when they are really drunk unless something happens that requires quick reactions, but the limits are arbitrary...

I think arbitrary traffic stops where all people are stopped violate the 4th Amendment. If those were eliminated, the only reason you would ever be tested for your alcohol level was if you were driving erratically or involved in an accident.

I think erratic driving for any reason is cause to pull people over.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 37015
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #72 - Jan 2nd, 2019 at 2:00pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 9:12am:
I'm guessing that if a police officer pulled someone over at 2:10 AM for "changing lanes without signaling" or too much window tint, coerced them to take a breathalyzer, and hauled them to jail, you say, "Yay government!"

You guess a lot about what I think, but you are almost always wrong. Cry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5865
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #73 - Jan 2nd, 2019 at 5:22pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 9:07am:
That's exactly right, Jeff.  I have a right to defend myself, which in turn gives me the right to authorize a police force or a private security force to defend me.  Just as you said, self defense by proxy.


So, collecting taxes is what by proxy? 



kaz:  Morons don't grasp NAP, but they like the way it sounds so they say they support it and make up their own definitions.

Enos:  No, that's wrong.  But I like the sounds of NAP and support aggression when I support it so I'll make up a definition of NAP that allows the aggression I want.

Cleetus:  Wrong, wrong, wrong.  NAP only allows aggression when I support it, not when you do.

Can't make up the stupid that Enos and Cleetus actually are.

Hint, the "N" in NAP stands for "non," not limited, reasonable or justified.  Under NAP, you idiots cannot initiate aggression.  Period
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8387
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #74 - Jan 2nd, 2019 at 10:13pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 8:16am:
It's what the NAP doesn't say that I'm talking about. It doesn't say self defense is forbidden or that restitution for damage you cause is forbidden or that legally authorized taxation for authorized purposes is theft.

These are things that morons read into the NAP without any justification at all.


That you can't pre-empt is part of the NAP, and most libertarian philosophers, including Rothbard, agree that you can't retaliate later: Self-defence means in the immediate, not hunting someone down to exact revenge.

If that guy waving a knife can prove he wasn't going to stab you, you're the aggressor. Go ahead and shoot him if you're comfortable risking committing aggression.

I follow the NAP, so I am not comfortable risking commission of aggression.
  

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: 5865
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #75 - Jan 3rd, 2019 at 7:09am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 10:13pm:
That you can't pre-empt is part of the NAP, and most libertarian philosophers, including Rothbard, agree that you can't retaliate later: Self-defence means in the immediate, not hunting someone down to exact revenge.

If that guy waving a knife can prove he wasn't going to stab you, you're the aggressor. Go ahead and shoot him if you're comfortable risking committing aggression.

I follow the NAP, so I am not comfortable risking commission of aggression.


Ding, ding, ding.

In NAP, courts are voluntary.  If you suspect I killed your family, then come to my house and I don't fight you, you can't use aggression.

They argue that I will agree to voluntary court because we're all good people and I will want to prove my ignorance.  If I don't want to do it, society will compel me with the threat of being ostracized and in the extreme I will be shunned.

It's stupid in the real world.  Their world is based on the fantasy concept of Little House on the Prairie where we live in a town of 100 people, we're all good people and I would be alone if I were shunned.

It's moronic.  And libertarians who claim to believe in it almost never understand what they are talking about, like Enos and Cleetus

  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 37015
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #76 - Jan 3rd, 2019 at 8:49am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 10:13pm:
That you can't pre-empt is part of the NAP, and most libertarian philosophers, including Rothbard, agree that you can't retaliate later: Self-defence means in the immediate, not hunting someone down to exact revenge.

If that guy waving a knife can prove he wasn't going to stab you, you're the aggressor. Go ahead and shoot him if you're comfortable risking committing aggression.

Rothbard says I have to let someone stab me before I can shoot them?

Rothbard says I can't find the man who murdered my daughter and bring him to justice?

Who are these other libertarian philosophers who say that if someone murders my daughter and escapes, I have to let him go?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 37015
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #77 - Jan 3rd, 2019 at 8:54am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 3rd, 2019 at 7:09am:
In NAP, courts are voluntary.
How do you derive that from the NAP?

https://www.libertarianism.org/encyclopedia/nonaggression-axiom

The NAP does not hold that retaliation in response to aggression is the initiation of aggression.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4665
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #78 - Jan 3rd, 2019 at 7:52pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 2nd, 2019 at 1:59pm:
I've lived in states where it was legal to drink while you were driving and I often had a beer on my way home...


OMG, I can so picture that!  Bud, Schlitz or a Milwaukee's Best?  Beat up VW van or beat up Japanese mini-pickup?

Quote:
I see no reason to make that illegal. I do see some sense in arbitrary limits on blood alcohol because there are people who can drive quite well when they are really drunk unless something happens that requires quick reactions, but the limits are arbitrary...

I think arbitrary traffic stops where all people are stopped violate the 4th Amendment. If those were eliminated, the only reason you would ever be tested for your alcohol level was if you were driving erratically or involved in an accident.

I think erratic driving for any reason is cause to pull people over.


Given the authoritarian statist world you envision (and that actually exists), in which a government that takes money by force to build roads that block our movement unless we apply hat-in-hand for a license to use them is a good government, sure.  If police are going to give out tickets, I'd prefer they give them for driving that is actually unsafe instead of setting speed traps to troll for fines against people who are safely driving the same speed as the drivers on the same road.
  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8387
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Drunk Driving in a Libertarian World - Yea or Nay?
Reply #79 - Jan 3rd, 2019 at 9:13pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 3rd, 2019 at 8:49am:
Rothbard says I have to let someone stab me before I can shoot them?


Not necessarily. You can defend against an overt threat.

But you are taking a risk if it wasn't actually a threat. If he wasn't going to stab you, and you shoot him, you're the aggressor.

Jeff wrote on Jan 3rd, 2019 at 8:49am:
Rothbard says I can't find the man who murdered my daughter and bring him to justice?


Correct. You need a private court to do that.

Jeff wrote on Jan 3rd, 2019 at 8:49am:
Who are these other libertarian philosophers who say that if someone murders my daughter and escapes, I have to let him go?


Do what I've done and study the Mises Institute and read. You'll find plenty.
  

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
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 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