You remember the huge action. What you don't remember is that George Bush got in and it ended up with a slap on the wrist (and that's stretching it) for Microsoft.

Still on page 1 but I didn't see it there...

Capitalism needs a store of value. It doesn't work exchanging  chickens for corn if  the chicken spoils and the corn rots. Sure, you'll eat well but it's only when you get to chicken jerky, feathers for decoration and dry storage for the corn that capitalism kicks in

Nice one. Though I'd just like to point out that not all British citizens are quite as hopeless as you make out (in the same was that many US citizens actually are). Worth bearing in mind that Washington was, at one point, a colonel in the British army.

I agree. There are many other possible causes of impairment including prescription drugs, incapacity due to age and just plain not being skilled at driving. A proper driving test and periodic re-qualification would do wonders for road safety.

Fortunately, this is likely to become moot in what will seem like a surprisingly short period of time. It wont be without its downsides though.

A little bit disingenuous as quoted as what's being criminalized is not UI but DUI.

There's an oft quoted phrase "Your right to swing your fist ends at the end of my nose". I've always felt a little uncomfortable with this as there are quite a few things that could go wrong that would end up with fist and nose coming into violent contact. It would also be interesting to see what would happen in an ancap society to a person who went around swinging their fist just short of people's noses.

Usually when things seem woolly like this issue, I usually find it means that the argument has not been thought through to first principles and insufficient information about the circumstances have been given. Government laws, for example, usually attempt to treat the circumstances and not the cause and are typically poorly thought out even for that.

It's scary when the training wheels come off for some.

Dude, it's not over until the BFL guys post to say they turned up to work and the doors were locked and the execs aren't answering their phones.

Though I'm not necessarily saying that will happen.

What is crazy is that drunk driving does increase risk for everyone and that there are laws about it yet those who cause drunk driving accidents are typically repeat offenders either because punishments are too low or they simply drive illegally. Government is simply not in a good position to administer access to the roads. They can't simply consider safety and efficiency but there are many other competing considerations and some hurdles based on (quite sound) legal restrictions on what government can actually do (those drunk-driving road blocks are a travesty

The driving test here in Tennessee is a joke also.

And how about the opposite? If deflation implies currency hoarding and delaying purchases, inflation implies early purchasing and hoarding of supplies, consequently pushing the price up for everyone else.

True. And I look forward to that day. Hopefully the daily commute will be obsolete for many also. I find it hard to believe all the fuss being made about the green agenda when no one seems to be pushing for the most obvious energy saving measure of all - removing the need to use a ton of steel to move a couple of hundred pounds of flesh around (let alone the human cost of it all).

This is a little tangental but interesting.

http://www.brake.org.uk/facts/naked-roads.htm

The essence is that by tightly regulating the roads, a false sense of security is engendered. When responsibility is put back of the driver, speeds drop in dangerous areas and safety is improved. Certainly I know of a couple of places where it would be possible to get in trouble from over-confidence in signs and markings.

To the question originally asked, I think the subject is somewhat muddied and is getting conflated with other issues. I think myrkul touches on this when he refers to threatening behavior but I don't think that's the whole story. Certainly it's possible to deliberately endanger people in ways that would not be considered breaking the law if there was no adverse outcome.

But a twist... That person is Adolf Hitler

But he's rescuing orphans...

One of whom would grow up to be Stalin

Another one, Einstein...

Just what do you do, man???

50% there. If you also privatise the roads, you'll contract to use them and agree to terms. Speed limits will be set according to safety and efficiency rather than to enrich local municipalities. Rules will be enforced likewise and not just because it's easy to sit at the side of the road and read numbers off of a display.

Course, that whole corporate limited liability thing will need to go too.

One reason could be that some vehicles are not capable of that speed and the roads are there for them as well. Though in this state there is a law that if you are travelling slower than 10mph under the speed limit and you have three vehicles behind you, you're supposed to get out of the way. Never enforced of course.

Begging the question once more, I see.

Where it really breaks down is that without the breeding and training from the farmer, the sheepdog is just a wolf himself. But the metaphor really isn't meant to be stretched that far.

Hmm, benefits from the labor of the sheepdog and slaughters the sheep? Gotta be a politician.

Back to the topic of the thread...

Gun owners mostly want to be left alone. By immediately trying to use a tragedy to push their agenda, gun control advocates have incited gun owners to respond and, perhaps more importantly, caused gun owners, in anticipation of restrictive legislation, to purchase guns and ammunition to the point that many stores are low on stock. Thus, by their actions, they have caused more of what they oppose.

So...



I didn't vote

Either way, I hope something happens soon. I'm getting sick of the taste of popcorn.

I think libraries are nearly defunct. But otherwise, I'd be willing to contribute to a library, far more than my "fair share" since I think they provide(d) a valuable service.

Unfortunately, the local library has turned into a political punching bag between the local government and state government. It's one of those "oh noes, we'll have to raise taxes or you'll lose <service x> that you like. Don't bring up all those <service y>s that you don't like. Schools! Hospitals! End of the World!"