There weren't cars in the 1770s so how could there be allowances for drunk driving. The constitution does allow for a 'right to life' which will cut very short by being hit by a boozey libertarian behind the wheel. Even John Locke didn't think building fences to protect people from straying too close to danger was to impinge on their freedom.
There weren't cars in the 1770s so how could there be allowances for drunk driving. The constitution does allow for a 'right to life' which will cut very short by being hit by a boozey libertarian behind the wheel. Even John Locke didn't think building fences to protect people from straying too close to danger was to impinge on their freedom.
Wibblypig 1 year ago
Comment removed
Wibblypig 1 year ago
so - there shouldn't be laws to prevent drunken driving?
Wibblypig 2 years ago
Thats not what he saying or talking about.
coldfireshot 2 years ago
what is he 'saying' and 'taking about' then genious?
Wibblypig 1 year ago
no there shouldn't be. maybe you've been indoctrinated so much you don't realize what is going on.
shakaama 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
indoctrinated by the fear of being killed by a drunk driver? Tell me, how are YOU so aware of whats 'going on'?
Wibblypig 1 year ago
@Wibblypig There is no allowance in The Constitution for them. So, according to the 10th ammendment, those laws should be decided by the States.
zootcst 1 year ago