-=> Quoting Charles Testerman to Doug Carter <=-
 CT> An interesting concept...... If someone, somewhere decides that an
 CT> activity is dangerous, we may igore our constitution....the SUPREME law
 CT> of the land. 
     Likely arises from the premier position accorded the RIGHT TO LIFE...
     and the principle that creates governments to create laws to protect
     the unalienable rights of the people you share your country with...
 CT> I am surprised that we haven't licensed "walking down the street"....
     Not too many people get killed by being run (walked) down on the 
reet..
 CT> If you see where I am comming from.... Even without a licensing
 CT> proceedure your rights in this country would be protected... If some
 CT> destroys your property or takes your life...
     I see it clearly, and I don't even strongly disagree... but the point
     is more that bad law can and should be changed or abolished... BUT it
     should not be IGNORED while in force, UNLESS you are willing to pay
     the penalty...  BAD LAW is often changed by public pressure on law 
akers
     by those who are willing to pay that price...  Also people are killed
     and injured daily by those who thoughtlessly ignore laws of all types...
     That is why we have police and laws for them to enforce... not to
     deprive people of their rights...  IF you suffer that problem, then
     you are correct to complain... but I've never suspected that most people
     object to good law enforcement... just those who can't bring themselves
     to obey the law...
 CT> Is the licensing proceedure a "due process"?. If it is, I would like
 CT> to know the offense that I am guilty of.
     Licensing has to do with control... not suppression of rights...
     Vehicle licensing is a means of distinguishing one vehicle from another
     and to be able to trace it if needed... as well as a means of taxing
     a share of certain costs to the owner if it is used in public space...
     Drivers licenses are intended to ensure a minimum standard for operator
     competence (very minimum in most places, I assure you)... and to again
     tax for the privilege of operating in public space...
     I hear of a RIGHT to TRAVEL quoted by people in transportation 
iscussion
     but so far I haven't seen it in writing... I guess it's in one of the
     'other' unalienable rights... not listed... perhaps a valid corollary
     to the Right of Assembly...
     Assuming it to exist, Pedestrian travel is the most that can be 
ssumed..
     maybe swimming... just what nature provided you with... no mention of
     fly, wheel etc.  Same goes for horses, carts not even my bicycle...
 CT> read, the concept of licensing came from British law, and we should
 CT> have become independent from England in 1776. You wouldn't know it if
 CT> you look at our legal system today. Lawyers take titles of nobility
 CT> (squire or esquire). Many Judges (but not all of them) wear black robes
 CT> and require the court room to worship them when they enter.
     YOU modified what was a basically sound system (complete with flaws)...
     you could have created something from scratch, but even British law
     was modeled on common sense and other justice systems preceeding it.
     WE still use the model of British (and French) law... and it is still
     a sound one... complete with flaws... and we have modified it too.
 CT> It is odd that the government licenses marriage.... a concept that was
 CT> started by God and is between a man and a woman for life....yet it is
 CT> licensed as a cause of "compelling public interest", and these words
 CT> are not in the constitution... they are words added by judges...and
 CT> our constitution has not been ammended to reflect this change.
     Mostly a tax on couples to handle the record keeping... too many
     enterprising gents and ladies taking too many spouses I suspect...
     or keeping it in the 'family' too much.  The amount may be the 
oblem...
 CT> like to point out that this country is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC not
     British system is Constitunal Monarchy... us too sort of...
 CT> There is provision to punish by due process for the cause of
 CT> the taking of life, liberty, or property that has already happened.
     Law is aimed at being a guideline as to proper behaviour in various
     instances... BEFORE the fact.
 CT> If we license or regualte an activity, we are dening people their
 CT> private property rights. Here again don't believe me, read the U.S.
 CT> Constitution word for word... and then look at the way things are
 CT> done, and compare the two. Do our actions match the supreme law of the
 CT> land?
     NO! You are protecting the MAJORITY of the Public's Rights to other
     things... LIFE foremost... Property and Liberty subservient...
     Your constitution demands that... not to mention the other voters..
 CT> The government has oppressed its citizenry many times in the past and
 CT> violated the constitution... Just ask the citizens of Japanese
 CT> ancestry what happened during World War II, or the people in Oklahoma
 CT> about their past.
     Bad governments get replaced... and have been known to publicly 
poligize
     OURS did to the Japanese recently... And to NA's... better late ...
     BTW, what do you think would have become of the Japanese Americans in
     the US if they had stayed in their own homes... I don't think that would
     have been pretty either... here or in the USA...
     As for Oklahoma, perhaps if the European Governments had repressed their
     peoples right to travel a bit more... that would not have happened...
     same if the British had restricted the right of assembly a bit more at
     Concord or Boston...
 CT> Maybe I will have the effect of Socrates's gad fly.
     Hope your SPOT on the wall of history is a bit more significant...
    Doug.
 
... Ottawa.sys corrupted - (A)bort (R)evolt (I)gnore -
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- Renegade v5-11 Exp
---------------