Drunk driving to be largely decriminalized in Alberta in 2018

[VIANARCHRIS]

If everyone else owns the roads, does everyone have an equal decision in how they will use them? How does that work?

If my argument is invalid, could you tell me what you think my argument is?

Yes.
We have these events every 4 years where we elect representatives to make the laws. Everyone gets a vote. That's kinda how a democracy works. If you don't like the rules, you can contact your representatives and plead your case for change. If that doesn't work, you can elect someone that will. Or you can run for office and help make the laws work better for you.
You don't need to cause somebody harm to break a law. Many laws, such as road rules, are in place to protect the innocent public from morons. My right to keep my family safe from idiots trumps your right to act like one.
If you don't like rules, why don't you just move to a country that has no laws? Let me know when you find one.

 

[CalyxCrusher]

Yes, I know what a logical fallacy is. So, if a person breaks a law, that alone provides the evidence necessary to say that the law breaker has harmed somebody?

See, I don't think you do know what it means given your response......

 

[Rob Roy]

Yes.
We have these events every 4 years where we elect representatives to make the laws. Everyone gets a vote. That's kinda how a democracy works. If you don't like the rules, you can contact your representatives and plead your case for change. If that doesn't work, you can elect someone that will. Or you can run for office and help make the laws work better for you.
You don't need to cause somebody harm to break a law. Many laws, such as road rules, are in place to protect the innocent public from morons. My right to keep my family safe from idiots trumps your right to act like one.
If you don't like rules, why don't you just move to a country that has no laws? Let me know when you find one.

So you never told me what you think my argument is?

You also never told me how if everyone owns the roads, how it can be that some individual people who are alleged to be part owners of the roads can have their choices of how the roads are administered ignored. Wouldn't that mean they don't really own the roads if their choices are unable to be expressed over "their property" ?

You certainly have a right to keep your family safe, but do you have a right to remove a persons control over property you allege that they own to do so?

 

[Rob Roy]

See, I don't think you do know what it means given your response......

Do you know what tragedy of the commons means?

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

So you never told me what you think my argument is?

You also never told me how if everyone owns the roads, how it can be that some individual people who are alleged to be part owners of the roads can have their choices of how the roads are administered ignored. Wouldn't that mean they don't really own the roads if their choices are unable to be expressed over "their property" ?

You certainly have a right to keep your family safe, but do you have a right to remove a persons control over property you allege that they own to do so?

You mean you continue to write garbage without knowing what your argument is? Weird.
Sorry if I used 'big book words' and got you all confused. You might want to brushup on your reading comprehension or have your mom read my responses to you a little slower.
You clearly are so dense as to not understand public ownership, taxes or democracy or how a society operates. I'm not about to give you a lesson. You need to go back to that school I partly own and listen to that teacher who's salary I partly pay. If there are 30 million Canadians, and we all contributed to building a road, why would you think YOUR use trumps that of the other 29,999,999 people that paid an equal amount?
You need to grow up, boy. My grandson was born 2 days ago and he's already showing more sense than you do.

 

[Rob Roy]

You mean you continue to write garbage without knowing what your argument is? Weird.
Sorry if I used 'big book words' and got you all confused. You might want to brushup on your reading comprehension or have your mom read my responses to you a little slower.
You clearly are so dense as to not understand public ownership, taxes or democracy or how a society operates. I'm not about to give you a lesson. You need to go back to that school I partly own and listen to that teacher who's salary I partly pay. If there are 30 million Canadians, and we all contributed to building a road, why would you think YOUR use trumps that of the other 29,999,999 people that paid an equal amount?
You need to grow up, boy. My grandson was born 2 days ago and he's already showing more sense than you do.

That was a lot of words to avoid answering a couple of simple questions.

If you "partly own" something, but you never get to exercise your choices over how to use it or not use it, and you're forced to pay for it anyway, can it still be said that you own it?

I don't think my choice trumps anyones over their choices for their own property. That seems to be part of your argument though. Since you allege a person can own something, yet other people can decide (trump) the uses of it. Isn't that an example of some people who you all allege have an equal ownership in something, having their wishes trumped?

Congrats on your new grandson. I know you're proud and all, but I'm not sure he has more sense than me.

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

If you "partly own" something, but you never get to exercise your choices over how to use it or not use it, and you're forced to pay for it anyway, can it still be said that you own it?

See my previous response explaining the voting process.

Since you allege a person can own something, yet other people can decide (trump) the uses of it.

See my previous response about elected representatives and running for office yourself

Congrats on your new grandson. I know you're proud and all, but I'm not sure he has more sense than me

Judging by your posts, I'm not convinced. He hasn't tried to pick a fight with me yet....

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

Rob
1.its never been a fair world ...
2. in some way we all pay for the roads..but do not get to call the shots
3.alcohol kills ..but driving under the influence of alcohol kills OTHERS....
4.nice little technical debate..but come on dude..thats just silly talk..

 

[since1991]

God I wouldnt like to live in Rob Roy world. That Libertarian laissez faire nut job of a world. Cmon. 7 billion people on this tiny rock of a planet with nowhere else to go and you still have people clinging to this fossil of a philosophy. Rob Roy..your nuts. Yeah I'm calling you and your bullshit out.

 

[Rob Roy]

See my previous response explaining the voting process.

See my previous response about elected representatives and running for office yourself

Judging by your posts, I'm not convinced. He hasn't tried to pick a fight with me yet....

So, you're admitting that a person can be "part owner" of something and never have their wishes of how to use that something be realized and that they are then still forced to pay for it? That somehow a political procedure then provides evidence of ownership, despite the reality that no ownership traits are present for at least some people involved?


I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. I'm disagreeing with some of your assumptions and pointing out why via questions which you seem unwilling to give responsive replies to or perhaps you've never pondered?

If I understand you correctly you are in favor of saying a person can be the ostensible equal owner of something, but that they never really get to decide how that thing will be used, and other "equal owners" do? It seems like you are not quite sure what the term owner is or isn't, since you are applying it in ways that show how an owner isn't really an owner.

My grandson could kick your baby grandson's ass, since he's 3 and yours is a weak infant. If I wasn't jesting, that would be an example of me trying to veer off topic and pick a fight with you.

 

[since1991]

People like Rob Roy never made it all the way around the block with this Ayn Rand bullshit. For this "everyman is his own entity..grab yourself up by the bootstraps" philosophy to work you need limited population growth...or infinite resources. News flash - the global population is and will continue to climb and this planet and all her contents is quite a FINITE resource. We arent finding another habitable planet anytime soon for this Libertarian bullshit to succeed. This isnt Manifest Destiny colonial tri cornered hat times anymore dude. Cmon.

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

Goodbye.

 

[Rob Roy]

Rob
1.its never been a fair world ...
2. in some way we all pay for the roads..but do not get to call the shots
3.alcohol kills ..but driving under the influence of alcohol kills OTHERS....
4.nice little technical debate..but come on dude..thats just silly talk..

1) agreed

2) Are you admitting that people don't really own the roads?

3) I'm not defending drunken driving as a good policy.

4) Thanks. Which part did you find silly?

 

[Rob Roy]

People like Rob Roy never made it all the way around the block with this Ayn Rand bullshit. For this "everyman is his own entity..grab yourself up by the bootstraps" philosophy to work you need limited population growth...or infinite resources. News flash - the global population is and will continue to climb and this planet is quite a FINITE resource. We arent finding another habitable planet anytime soon for this Libertarian bullshit to succeed. This isnt Manifest Destiny colonial tri cornered hat times anymore dude. Cmon.

Never was a big fan of those silly hats.

Which statements have I made that you disagree with ?

 

[Rob Roy]

Goodbye.

May you find peace on your road.

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

May you find peace on your road.

You ever tried cannabis, Rob? This forum is about cannabis. maybe you were looking for roaditup.org instead?

 

[Rob Roy]

God I wouldnt like to live in Rob Roy world. That Libertarian laissez faire nut job of a world. Cmon. 7 billion people on this tiny rock of a planet with nowhere else to go and you still have people clinging to this fossil of a philosophy. Rob Roy..your nuts. Yeah I'm calling you and your bullshit out.

Well that was certainly an emotion filled response.

I'm patient though, could you point out how a person can be said to "equally own" something, yet have others choices dictate the uses of that something to the exclusion of others ?

I hear that you are calling me out, but it would clarify things if you could be more specific and point out which parts you disagree with and why? Thanks.

 

[Rob Roy]

You ever tried cannabis, Rob? This forum is about cannabis. maybe you were looking for roaditup.org instead?

Cannabis? Sounds familiar. I think somebody put some in my drink one time.

The roaditup thing was funny, but it doesn't answer my questions. If you believe in two opposing things hard enough and get others to join you, will a thing which is false become true?

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

Rob Roy, )

1.agreed

>ok check

2) Are you admitting that people don't really own the roads?

> you can own things and not have complete control of them..you may co own them
but you do notc all the shots

3) I'm not defending drunken driving as a good policy.
>ok

4) Thanks. Which part did you find silly?

>defending the talk that drunk driving should be largely decriminalized by using ownership of the roads and..the drinker m ight make it home ok most of the time..as well as if we own the roads that gives us all the right to make our own rules

 

[Rob Roy]

Rob Roy, )

1.agreed

>ok check

2) Are you admitting that people don't really own the roads?

> you can own things and not have complete control of them..you may co own them
but you do notc all the shots

3) I'm not defending drunken driving as a good policy.
>ok

4) Thanks. Which part did you find silly?

>defending the talk that drunk driving should be largely decriminalized by using ownership of the roads and..the drinker m ight make it home ok most of the time..as well as if we own the roads that gives us all the right to make our own rules

Thank you for your response.

So, if a road is co-owned, can a person sell their portion of the road which they own?

My main point was that at least some individual people who are alleged to be part owners of the road, are not in actuality part owners of the road, since they do not possess the ability to realistically make ownership choices about the road.

Also, I asked if a person who had been legally intoxicated made it home safely after driving on the road, who they should pay money to? Should they pay money to all of the other owners ? Who has been harmed and how is another question.