Saturday, November 29, 2008

Basics of Liberty

It seems most of my writing energy has been going towards commenting on another blog for the past few days. I don't normally spend so much time commenting elsewhere, but this is a very good discussion. The topics don't sound promising at first, dealing as they do with the platform of the LP, but the topic only serves as a foot in the door to discussing real "liberty issues".

Dissecting the Libertarian Party…. Act I

Dissecting the Libertarian Party… Act II

Libertarian Platform Act III

Go, read, think, and comment. I'm sure he would appreciate it. In the comments you will be "treated" (?) to more of my thoughts on the basics of liberty than I have put in writing in quite some time.

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Happy Thankful THINKsgiving

It is good to be thankful, but you also need to be "thinkful". Think about the good things in your life and about how you can keep them. Think about the bad things and how those can be fixed. Think about the true value of those around you. Think about how you can advance the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of yourself and your loved ones.

There are a lot of things I am thankful for. Not just today, but everyday. I am sure that the same is probably true for you. So, say "thank you" to those you are thankful to.

And speaking of those I am thankful to: Thank you, dear reader!


Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Working Through the "Blahs"

It's that time of the year. The depressing time. Less sunlight; heightened expectations; social pressures; no way to blow off steam. And just behind the curtain, I feel the pressure of the growing police-state closing around .... well, around all of us.

So, instead of whining about it, I am trying to think of ways to, not just keep the liberty I have, but to increase the real, tangible liberty in my life.

Part of that is education. I don't necessarily seek out the information (that would be overwhelming and even more depressing), but I remember that which I run across. Absorb and categorize. The technology of the state is fragile, whether they admit it or not. The more they rely on technology, the more an inventive, creative person can defeat them.

Part of the "plan" is preparing my mind-set. This involves "survival mentality". Prepare for the worst, while hoping for the best. Or the "not so bad" at least.

Cleaning my guns usually helps my mood, too.


Tuesday, November 25, 2008

"Great Planetwide State-Out"

I was thinking about the recent "Great American Smoke-Out" and thinking there are better things to focus on. I mean... who is spending their time encouraging people to not smoke for one day? Non-smokers? Other smokers? If you don't want to smoke, don't.

Anyway, I thought it would be great if there were one day a year when we could encourage people to refuse to participate in the state. Just one day to illustrate that it is unnecessary to rely on the state for anything.

On that day, those who work for government in any capacity could stay home. No government services would be used (other than the coercive monopolies that can't be avoided, of course). No taxable purchases would be made. All just for one day. It should be a lot easier than asking smokers to not smoke one day. But then I may be underestimating the addictive powers of the state on some people.

If you like this idea, let's discuss it and come up with a plan.


Monday, November 24, 2008

"Calling John Galt"

A new blog that shows a lot of promise. Check it out: Calling John Galt

More on Abortion

Recent discussions have brought this toxic topic to my mind again. I wish I had a concrete answer, backed up by rock solid logic and data, to show you once and for all that abortion is either right or wrong. But I don't. Everything is based upon religion, emotion, or feelings. You can base personal views on those things, but you should never inflict those views, through coercion, on others.

I don't like abortion, but I also understand that advocating or passing "laws" to prohibit it is wrong. "Laws" only provide an excuse to punish people. That adds to this perverted "culture of punishment" that we are already wallowing in. Nothing is made better by this course of action.

If you think abortion is wrong, I challenge you to change peoples' minds with facts, not with scare tactics, emotionalism, or threats. And absolutely not by attacking them with the big stick of the state. That tends to turn rational people against you. If you are right that abortion is morally wrong, two wrongs still DO NOT make a right.

I already do everything I morally can to prevent abortions: Being male, I have never had an abortion. Plus I have never advised anyone to get one unless their life was in serious danger. That is all I can do without sticking my nose where it doesn't belong. A lot of other people and groups would do well to follow my example.


Sunday, November 23, 2008

My Crystal Ball

I write these blog posts ahead of time. Usually a week or so ahead. I could be dead a week before anyone would notice. My blog would go on without me, until the pre-written posts run out, anyway.

That's not the point, though. What amazes me is how many times I start to write about something, and then before it posts, that subject pops up in the news or in my life. It happens over and over again.

Now, if only I could harness this "power"....


Saturday, November 22, 2008

Calling All Statists

I don't use the term "statist" in an attempt to start a fight, I simply know of no other word to designate those who believe that "government" is a legitimate human activity. Substitute your own word of choice in the title if "statist" offends you.

I would really like to hear from some people who think I am completely wrong. If you really believe that government control is superior to individual liberty, then try to convince me. Don't bother trying to convince me it is possible to balance the two or that government control does not negate individual liberty, because that would be pointless. Although, if that is really what you believe, go ahead and state that for the record. I will not agree with you or believe you, but it is important to know where you stand for the debate.

If you can't make that argument, but know someone else who can and would be interested, send them a link to this post and invite them to speak their mind. I would really like to know where I am wrong, if I am wrong.


Friday, November 21, 2008

Prisoners' Rights

A right can be respected or violated, but can not be regulated, licensed, restricted, or limited. At least, not "justly". Not even for those who are incarcerated. (Otherwise it wouldn't be a "right", but only a "privilege". ) That means that when "society" prevents a prisoner from exercising his rights, society is (temporarily?) violating his rights. Is it right? Is it necessary? Is it worth it?

I'm not saying it isn't; I'm just wondering.


Thursday, November 20, 2008

To Bush's Supporters

This letter is not aimed at most of my readers, but only at those who supported Bush through all of his presidency, whether because of "religious" reasons, or because you really enjoy seeing other countries invaded and "those people" killed. Very difficult times are coming. And it is more your fault than the fault of the politicians who will usher in the hard times. You are the ones who keep believing it is OK for a government to control my life. You are the ones who allowed it to go this far and called the dissenters like me "crazy" for speaking up against the abuses.

All of you who supported Bush while he violated the rights and liberties of people you disapprove of have seen your chickens come home to roost. You closed your eyes while he violated his oath of office from the moment of his inauguration and now you will pay the price. All the tools of the expanded presidency are now in the hands of a man who will have no problem targeting you.

It is funny to me, being a libertarian, seeing you wringing your hands in despair now. All the dictatorial powers that Bush stole, with your acquiescence, Obama will now use against you. It was fine for Bush to take these powers as long as he was using them against "the other side", but now you will be Obama's target. How does it feel?

You cry out in anguish that Obama will appoint federal judges who favor gay rights and abortion, yet you thought nothing of Bush appointing federal judges who favored the war on drugs or whatever police-state tool you liked. Bush invaded foreign countries and violated the Constitution. You ignored it or even cheered. You waved your federal flag. Now Obama will have his way with you. Using the weapons that Bush stole and stockpiled in the Oval Office. The weapons of "extraordinary rendition", "the Decider", Gitmo, the "PATRIOT" Act, the Military Commissions Act, etc. All of them will now be aimed at you and your family.

I hope you live to regret your complicity and feel your guilt. And I hope you learned your lesson: It is never OK to meddle in other peoples' lives if they are harming no one else. Never! No human being has the right, under ANY circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, nor to advocate or delegate its initiation. That obviously includes human beings who are running (or working for) the government.

Your support of laws allowing discrimination against certain people based upon victimless behaviors or preferences have made Obama dangerous to all our liberties, just as Bush was. Each president is worse, both personally and politically, than the preceding president. Obama may have skipped us ahead an administration or two, but the historical trend has not really changed.

It is time to acknowledge that government is not a legitimate human activity, but is just large scale theft, murder, kidnapping, extortion.... coercion - force - violent aggression. It is completely wrong in every instance. "Good" cannot be accomplished through evil actions. Stop pretending it can. It is time to withdraw your support completely from the system. Don't give up your freedom to the next parasite who pretends to be on your side in order to get your vote. He is lying too.

I am willing to forgive your part in the coming "interesting times". Please just come to your senses before it is too late.


Wednesday, November 19, 2008

National Ammo Day is TODAY

Don't forget that today is National Ammo Day. Please buy at least 100 rounds of ammo today. Your chances to do so "legally" may be evaporating soon. Make sure you have enough* if that happens.

*I know, there is no such thing as enough ammo. Try anyway. After the state collapses, you can use the extra for currency.


Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Blogging: Is There a Point?

Why blog? Since I don't think it is right to force my views on anyone, my only alternative is to try to convince you that I am right, and that liberty is really the best way to live life. That is really the only point to this blog.

I started this blog as a campaign blog for my presidential run. That is over now, yet I keep writing.

As long as think I am still doing some good, I will continue to blog. Some people will continue to view me as a crackpot. That can't be avoided without abandoning my principles. The state's brainwashing runs deep in most people today. Anyone who points out its flaws will seem ridiculous to anyone who refuses to think critically about the reality. I seek to make them think. Sometimes that means stating the facts in a stark manner, and letting the chips lie where they fall. I don't intend to hurt anyone's feelings. It is simply unavoidable at times.

I deeply appreciate those of you who have written to express your support of this blog, and especially appreciate those who have donated money as a show of support. Your kindness will not be forgotten.


Ammo Day Reminder

Don't Forget!

Monday, November 17, 2008

Should "Immoral" = "Illegal"?

My answer is "of course not". As you probably know, I don't think there is any justification for any "law". However, I can understand making "laws" against initiated force and theft, even while realizing it is an exercise in futility. I just think "laws" are pointless and ridiculous. If something is wrong, making a law against it doesn't make it impossible to do. Making "laws" against "immorality" is even worse. Many times no one is hurt, except ...possibly.... the person behaving "immorally".

Then there is the problem of whose moral code do you follow? And why choose that particular one over the other possibilities?

If you go by the Christian moral code, just as an example, you could pass "laws" against prostitution, gay marriage, adultery, theft, and murder. But then you would also be able to justify passing "laws" against working on Sunday, men with long hair and women with short hair, eating shellfish, and killing (but not necessarily against beating) your slaves. Slavery would still be fine, as would having many wives and concubines. And the penalty for raping a virgin would be marrying the victim. Strange "morality".

If you base your "laws" on a different religion's moral code, the details would be different, even if there were similarities with the "big stuff" like murder and theft. So you would need to pass "laws"regulating a plethora of ridiculous things that prohibiting "morally" must have seemed "right... at the time".

The wiser choice is to stop criminalizing self defense, and recognize that your morality may not be your neighbor's morality. And to realize that as long as no innocent person is being harmed, what other people do in their private lives is none of your business and it is wrong to try to make it your business. That kinda takes the wind out of the busy-bodies' sails doesn't it?


Saturday, November 15, 2008

Children and Adults

Babies and children really can't take care of themselves; adults can. There is a real, absolute, concrete difference. Parents have a legitimate responsibility to care for their children. That sometimes means keeping the children from doing things that will harm them... often against their will. It is right to do so. Does your protection violate their rights and liberty? Does it violate the ZAP? Probably in the same way as pushing a person out of the path of a speeding stagecoach does. When your children are old enough or mentally aware enough to understand the principle, ask them how they feel about it.

Meddling political types often use the same rationalization when "protecting" adults from harming themselves. They claim to know better than the targets of their meddling. It doesn't matter even if they really do. Adults are not children and should not be treated as such. Adults have had years to learn how the world works; both physical processes and human interaction. If they somehow managed to avoid learning, that is their problem and should not be used as an excuse to interfere in the lives of the rest of us. Even the targets of the protective meddling could demand restitution from the state's agents for having their rights violated and for having force initiated against them "for their own good".

If, however, they enjoy being taken care of like helpless children, then as long as the state survives, let them. Just don't make anyone else pay for it or be subjected to the same stupidity. If they are still not smart enough to survive after the state is gone, at least they will improve the gene pool by removing themselves from it.


Friday, November 14, 2008

Politics- Diversionary Tactic For The State

The more I think about it and the more I look at real-world results, the more I think that politics is a waste of time. At least for people who are interested in Liberty.

I'm not going to blast you for pursuing that path if that is what you want to do. If nothing else, you will be a distraction to the "Rulers" if you are annoying enough. Be a buzzing, biting fly ceaselessly attacking politicians' ears and eyes. It isn't my path, though. The system is hopelessly rigged. The right questions are not even allowed to be asked. Instead of asking who should be ruling us, people should be asking if someone should be ruling us. Instead of voting away privileges, people should be exercising their rights.

I have seen zero evidence that politics can increase freedom in any way. At best, it holds the predators off for a year or two. In the long run that may not even be very helpful. It gives a false sense of accomplishment. It puts off what must be done. It also keeps people from living free in their own lives.


Thursday, November 13, 2008

Just a thought....

I think that some day, people will look back and be astounded that we ever tolerated government roads.

"Free Market"? Hardly!

"Free market". The term refers to voluntary interaction and trade without government interference or coercion. Seems pretty straightforward, right?

There is an organization I recently became aware of called "The Free Market Foundation". They are not concerned with freedom, but with using government to promote their brand of religion. They do advocate keeping government out of the areas where government intervention would offend their beliefs, but as soon as government meddling can advance their agenda, they run to government.

They fight against the ACLU, which is battling government in many areas. The ACLU definitely has its blind spots as far as supporting some rights while ignoring others, but the Free Market Foundation opposes them because it opposes allowing people to exercise their basic human rights which happen to offend the group's sensibilities. This is mainly because these "free marketeers" wish to get government to support discrimination against gay people. The ACLU also tries to keep the government in compliance with the First Amendment protection of freedom of religion and establishment of none; something the Free Market Foundation opposes. This is not "free market" but government intervention. A group really concerned with the free market would only be advocating the removal of laws, not the passage of new ones.

They have the right to call their organization anything they choose, of course. I also have the right to point out their hypocrisy. How would they appreciate a group of Iraqi Muslims calling themselves "The American Christian Foundation"? Probably not too much, and they would probably run to the government to force them to change their name.

I wrote to them pointing out their "error", but I never got a response. In my mind, that just compounds the dishonesty.


Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Let's Be Animals

As a way to survive (and succeed) while we wait for the state to implode, I suggest we behave like wild animals. No, I don't think we should eat our young or one another. What I mean is that we should simply live our lives and ignore the shenanigans in government unless we are cornered.

Animals don't care or worry about who imagines himself the Ruler of America. They don't concern themselves with "laws". All that matters to them is getting on with the business of living. That includes biting, clawing, or flogging anyone who tries to trap them. Don't be a pet or farm animal who grovels or submits to a fleecing. Cling to your hide and defend your territory. And ignore the flatulence wafting from DC or more local sources.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

"Wow! The Renaissance of America!"

Here is another mention of my writings, this time in Christian Butterbach's blog: "Wow! The Renaissance of America!"

"The Top 100 Libertarian Blogs"

Here, from a non-libertarian site, is their list of "The Top 100 Libertarian Blogs". I'm not sure what criteria they used to choose, but I was happy to see myself on there. Of course, they included me with the "politicians". Eww! The campaign is over so if I ever was one, I'm not one anymore!

"Forever Stamps"

Do you notice that the US government assumes it will exist forever? I ran across one of those "Forever Stamps" today. You know, the ones that are supposed to be good "forever" no matter what the price of mailing a letter climbs to. I think there is some baseless assuming going on there. "Forever Stamps" are good "forever" only if the US government lasts forever. The courier company that replaces the government monopoly after the US is gone will not honor them. Why should they?

Why would the US government and its supporters make such an irrational and silly assumption about its permanence? Probably because they honestly can't imagine the alternative. But there has never been a government that lasts "forever", and I seriously doubt there ever will be. Few last more than a couple centuries. It just isn't rational to ignore this fact. The more a government meddles, the less likely it is to last much longer. The more strict a government is, the sooner it collapses. And the less mercy its "organs" and collaborators receive.

That doesn't mean that a free society is the inevitable outcome, but it does mean that to make that happen, some plans need to be made. Now. I'm making mine; how about you?


Sunday, November 09, 2008

An Instinct for Liberty

I hope I am not alone in this, and judging by what I read from a few other people out there, I suspect I am not, but I feel as though I have an instinct for liberty. It just seems to be a natural part of my existence. I am not talking about anything mystical, but a natural, inborn understanding of what liberty really is and why it is important to protect. Read the rest

Saturday, November 08, 2008

Life, Love, and Liberty

This is a different kind of post. It is more philosophical than I normally write. You may think I am completely off-base, but I can only judge this by own life. Think what you will.

I think that in order to be happy and fulfilled, humans need life, love, and liberty. When I say "life", I don't mean mere existence, but "A Life"; a "Purpose". Those are the minimum requirements. You can have one or two of those and still be relatively content, but without all three, you may seek a substitute for that missing component.

The substitutions that come first are entertainment, sex, and money. Entertainment can make you forget that you don't have much of a life. After all, living vicariously can make you feel more alive, can't it? Sex can take away the pain of living without love, since it is usually a part of a life that has enough love in it. And money can buy you a lot of privileges that can be almost indistinguishable from real liberty. The only difference is that when the money is gone, so is the "freedom". Yet there is another level down from these substitutes.

The last level can be the saddest. I am not saying these things are necessarily bad, just that if they are your only outlet for those higher level needs, they are not really satisfying. This is the level of diversions, porn, and debt.

Diversions may not really entertain you, but only occupy your time. They keep your mind and hands busy and keep you from thinking about how bad your life is. If your life is normally OK, then a diversion now and then doesn't hurt anything. In that case, it is just a way to spend your down-time. At the worst, they are the busy-work you do while waiting to die. Porn is sex without human contact. While those who have real love can enjoy porn, to have it as your only outlet is tragic. Then there is debt. It is pretending to be able to buy things that you really can't afford. It might give you a little temporary illusion of freedom while it bolts the chains around your ankles. You are betting on an uncertain future.

I would say that most of us have dipped into the substitutes for Life, Love, and Liberty from time to time. It is my hope that you and I do not end up spending our lives down there.


Friday, November 07, 2008

Rights Violators

Why is it that most people seem more interested in taking rights away from others than they are in securing their own rights? This is just an observation from the recent election. If it weren't for the promises of keeping some "other people" from "legally" exercising their rights, there wouldn't have been many political ads out there.

Whether it is "gay rights", abortion, gun ownership, migrants, or economics, as long as no one is being coerced, their lives are not your business. Liberty will never be increased while we keep fighting over keeping others from living their own lives as they see fit. Live free and mind your own business around others.


Thursday, November 06, 2008

Revisionist History

Government always lies.

I grew up surrounded by conservatives to whom "revisionist history" was blasphemy. As I have since discovered, it should probably be called "revealed history". History gets revised as new information, long suppressed by those in government who would be exposed, becomes available. Often because the perpe-traitors die off.

As a somewhat frivolous example, the government's OFFICIAL story about "The Roswell Crash" has changed multiple times. If no one had pressed the issue, the government would not have bothered changing its story. Well, other than changing the original official government revelation that a crashed "disc" had been recovered. And, for the record, I don't think an extraterrestrial spacecraft crashed in Roswell in 1947. But I do know the government has lied about the event ever since it happened. Each current version is said to be the final word... until the next version, anyway.

How many other events were allowed to go unexamined and therefore remained unchanged from the original, dishonest, version? How many have been examined, but the findings marginalized? The Civil War? Pearl Harbor? JFK? Viet Nam? Waco? The OKC explosion? 9/11?

How many evil people have been undeservedly honored by history? Washington? Lincoln? FDR? Or all of the above.

The reason history gets revised is because "history is written by the winners". Government always initially lies about an event when the truth would make them look bad (which the truth will always do for a group based upon coercion and theft). The government that "wins" gets its version of the story made "official". The lies become a part of the cultural mythology and are defended with the fervor of a religion. People have a need to cling to those lies and myths in order to not feel they have thrown their lives away supporting an evil, dishonest institution. But the truth is the truth. Sometimes it is painful. Let it go.


Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Probably Not What They Bargained For...

Here's some "hope and change" for you: Hooray for Obama!

Will You Remember THIS 5th of November?

An opportunity is knocking. This could be the beginning (or the middle) of the end for government. If we care enough to make it happen. Won't you contribute to the movement? Encourage all your electorally disappointed friends and family to withdraw support of the illegitimate government now.

Now that the election is past, it is time to realize that government can only rule you if you let it. Don't. People should NOT be afraid of "their" government; governments should be afraid of the people. Make them afraid. Get a backbone. Stop bowing. Stop apologizing. Stop obeying. Stop paying any attention to government at any level. They are the bad guys. Remind them of that fact if they force you to. Ignore them otherwise.

We outnumber them. We always have and always will.

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Election Day: No One is "Fit To Be President"

There is no one on the planet who is "fit to be president". Not. One. Person. Voting for someone is going against this simple truth. When you vote, you are saying that you think it is OK for someone to rule others. It is not.

Military "service" does not qualify a person to rule others. Being "dog catcher" does not qualify someone to rule others. Being elected to lower positions and working your way up the ladder of corruption does not qualify someone to rule others. "Experience" does not qualify someone to rule others. In fact, I think all the above should automatically disqualify a candidate. Only insanity would make a person imagine that it is OK for them to rule others. Insane people should not be elevated into positions of power over others where they can do harm.

I include myself in the above assessment. I am not fit to rule others. If I ever believed I would actually be elected when I asked for your votes, I would be insane and/or evil. I still believe it is best to not vote. I would not condemn you for voting, since I understand the desperation. Write in my name to satisfy your urge to vote so that you do no harm. But.... Voting doesn't help. It doesn't protect liberty. It doesn't protect your rights. The results would be thrown out on some technicality if they actually made any difference towards increasing liberty in any meaningful way. Or the results would just be ignored. Examples abound.

The only things that should possibly be voted upon are things that no one disputes should be done and that don't violate anyone's rights in any way. And then those who do not agree should not be forced to participate or finance those actions. The voting should really just be a way to say "I approve this and I volunteer to chip in to pay for it."

I'll let you in on a "secret": Big government is sure to win the election. You and I are sure to lose if we continue to participate and care. It is a done deal. The system is hopelessly rigged.

If you vote, you shouldn't complain about the results. After all, you have agreed that the system is legitimate, and you have agreed to abide by the results whether "your side" wins or loses. So any disaster that results is in your lap.

Now, instead of voting, get out there and do something real with your life.


Monday, November 03, 2008

Voting - My Libertarian / Anarchist Opinion

Voting is like choosing your next meal from the tank of a portable toilet behind the downtown bus station.



Sunday, November 02, 2008

Today in The Libertarian Enterprise

Do you get those ridiculous emails that try to scare you about immigrants by giving you all the statistics about how bad they are? Me too. Normally I just delete them, but this time I decided to do something different. And then I passed it along to The Libertarian Enterprise.
See the results here.

Saturday, November 01, 2008

Drunk Driving

The core of this post is taken from an email conversation I had with someone a while back. I got to thinking about those police-state abominations called "checkpoints" and decided I should put this out there for all to see.

The problem isn't driving with a blood-alcohol content ("BAC") of a certain level, but causing harm by driving when you are "impaired". Impairment can come in many forms, not just alcohol or chemical related, but emotional, physiological, distractions, and other "problems". A "standard" BAC is not possible or reasonable. Anyone who causes damage, injuries, or death for any reason should be held accountable. Punishing people for potentially causing harm isn't good, not even if you think they are likely to cause harm.

That is how the anti-gun crowd operates. The fact that other people do bad things is no excuse to violate my rights in even the slightest way.

I think that someone who knows they have a drinking problem might, when they are sober, choose to install an ignition breathalyzer to prevent ruining their own lives. Especially if their insurance company (the only ones who should set any such standards anyway) were to give a discount for it. I also envision car companies in a free society making more crashproof cars and offering different options to defend against accidents. Would people be willing to pay the extra amount? I don't know. The thing is the cost should be borne by the ones who wish to pay it, and not by the ones who don't. As it is, we ALL pay the price for everyone else's stupidity, both real and potential.

Why couldn't cops, if they must get involved, simply help the drunks get home instead of turning it into an opportunity to shove someone around, kidnap them, and rob them? Is it a "power thing"?

Many people today hate insurance companies, and don't want them having anything to do with driving. I think the biggest problem with insurance companies comes from the state requiring insurance. If they had to compete for your business, other than just assuming you have to pick someone, I think they would be much more innovative and helpful in their dealings with customers. They would have much more leeway in what behaviors they penalized and rewarded. Some things obviously increase their financial risk, and that is why they would reasonably charge more for someone who doesn't wear a seatbelt. However, you might have such a good driving record that it would more than offset their risk and cause them to give you a discount. I don't really know what all might happen.... BUT, in a FREE market you would probably pay a tiny fraction of your current expense no matter what. That is the effect of eliminating the monopoly.

I would pay more for a car with active collision avoidance technology. Even though I don't drink. I have almost fallen asleep at the wheel too many times. That would also help pedestrians who would otherwise be in danger of being run down by drunk drivers. That is part of what I mean by "crash proof". I am also thinking that there are other ways of protecting the occupants and other vehicles that haven't been implemented yet. I wouldn't mind having a car that could drive itself as long as I could override that option if I wanted to. I have issues with letting others have control (even a machine).

As always, I am sure these are not the only solutions to the problem, since the market is more responsive, and people are much more clever, than is usually recognized. If a problem exists, it can be solved without violating rights. Once again, government is NOT the solution.

Added: Eric Sundwall posted this link in the Haloscan comments and I think it needs to be read: Legalize Drunk Driving.