Quote:
Originally Posted by pclem
That's an unfair argument because many states didn't require them at all. Production cars were invented in 1886, and South Dakota didn't institute drivers licenses until 1959, and there were dozens of other states that had no licenses over the half century after car travel became more common. Horse and carriage travel is likely as or more dangerous than car travel on a per capita accident basis, and there were no licenses required for them.
DUI should not be a crime unless you cause an accident. If you cause an accident, and the penalty for that can be severe, you can agree to not drive as a condition of non-imprisonment rather than having a license revoked.
There's no need for pilot's licenses either. If you screw up, you die. If you're carrying others, they should know you're not trained and fly at their own risk. If you're operating an airline, you're liable for any damage you cause and your customers are going to want to make sure you have trained pilots. Private schools/certifications could achieve that just as easily as government licenses. Airport owners could require that all pilots landing there be trained/certified.
Wrong - it's a traffic ticket in every state I'm aware of; not a misdemeanor, no arrest or jailtime involved, 'period.'
-------
I'm not even concerned with having to have a drivers license, I'm concerned with your highly disturbing obsession with taking them away when it does nothing to stop the spread of disease. And when the vaccine itself does nothing to stop the spread of disease either.
|
It is not an unfair argument. In the history of the last several decades, since licenses have been required not one judge has agreed with you.
It is the same for pilots and drivers licenses. Yeah, if I screw up, I could die....AND take other people with me. And those other people aren't necessarily my passengers
Licenses are there for a reason, and very few people are going to agree with your claim that all people should be allowed to drive in all situations.
Really? DUI should be legal as long as there is no accident? I should be allowed to barrel down the road drunk out of my mind and you'd be totally cool sharing the road with me?
No laws whatsoever on unsafe behavior? Perhaps I should be able to let off celebratory gunfire in the middle of the Las Vegas Strip and it should be perfectly legal as long as no one gets hit?
Laws aren't just there to punish tragedies, they are there to prevent them.
And I don't know where you live, but in Virginia, you would be taken into custody while your vehicle is impounded. You will have to post bond to get out, have a new court date, and face fines, a longer suspension, possibly going back to jail as part of your sentence, and have a criminal record.
If you get pulled over and your license comes up suspended, the officer does not simply hand you a ticket and send you on your way to resume driving on a suspended license. That would completely defeat the purpose of driving on a suspended license.
You are also not covered by insurance while driving on a suspended license, and in Virginia, if another driver hits you, then both that driver and their insurance company is off the hook, on the grounds that you should not have been there to hit in the first place. Courts are not there to help someone who comes in with dirty hands.
Nothing you have said is true, in fact, none of it is even logical.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
