I need some help and I think this is a reasonable place to ask and maybe get some good opinions on a topic most of us take for granted:
Is it a right or a privilege to drive a car?
My own take on this matter is this: You have the right to keep and bear arms. Is it a privilege then to buy ammunition, and then use the gun? By that I mean, once you buy/own the gun you must have the right to load it and use it, provided you don’t commit a crime with it or disturb anyone else’s peace, or infringe on the publics’ rights in any way. Using the gun responsibly is A self imposed duty, and if not done wisely, may land you in trouble with the law. The law is pretty clear in this matter.
Do you have a right to own a car? The answer is Yes. Does someone have the right to tell you it’s a privilege to then use it, no matter if you do so responsibly, and cause no harm to another, or interfere with the publics peace in any way?
So many people I talk to cant seem to grasp what I am asking and I don’t know why.
The principle is the same. If you have the right to own something then you must have the right to use it, or owning it wouldn’t make any sense. Everyone (99.%) thinks that you need a license to drive a car responsibly, and that same group says adamantly that it is their right to own a gun.
If the public safety is the issue how do you argue that using a car is more dangerous to the public than using a gun. The constitution didn’t talk about specifics it couldn’t know about so it gave fundamental principles on which the laws were based and when I draw a comparison to the underlying principle, the disconnect is staggering.
To make the roads safer the government has put up signs to alert drivers of potential hazards to expect, speeds to safely travel, zones in which you need to be more cautious, Etc… That is all the government can really do in that regard for safety. The tickets, suspensions and conversion of not paying the resulting fines are now considered a criminal matter, and you can be subject to 5000 dollars in one fine and 1 year incarceration for not being able to pay a fine (criminal) where no one was injured, disregarding that the act of driving is not really done with criminal intent, by any stretch of the imagination, in everday life.
The vice president shot a guy in the face and that wasn’t criminal.
It seems to me, a very cynical and confused me, that everyone has simply been told that a license to do a thing is necessary simply because everyone thinks so. That may be true, but WHY?
There are a million nuances to this argument but based on what I have presented what is your take on it? I would be grateful to get any and all replies, even if you think I am a complete dipshit for making this argument, I really mean it. I’m just curious if I stand so far outside the circle of right and wrong that I simply need to forget it and find some kind of pill that will allow me to conform to the way everyone else thinks, or if in the context of what a free person is allowed to do, absent harm to others, is something that is a right that comes with the ability to own and the responsibility to use it wisely.
Thanks in advance if you respond. Thanks if you don’t.
