If you have "no place to go," come here!

oh where oh where can my baby be?

SteveAudio's picture

The OCRegister, in what I'm sure is a Libertarian rant with no intention of irony, says:

And Paris Hilton is in jail only because of this entirely arbitrary government fiat.

Whether the level is 0.08 percent or 0.10 percent, why should someone's blood alcohol level in itself be a crime?

Maybe having that much alcohol in their blood makes some people less likely to drive safely. But there are lots of perfectly legal things that can make you a less-safe driver. Cell phones and iPods are common distractions. A law school professor of mine was known to read books while driving. Then there's one of the biggest, most dangerous distractions: the person sitting next to you. And don't forget noisy kids in the back seat.

OK. In the hands of Richard Pryor, this might be funny. But here's more:

Why should alcohol consumers be singled out for punishment – as demanded by the 19th century Woman's Christian Temperance Union – except that the prohibitionists' modern-day counterparts, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, are organized against them?

. . . In general, we don't punish people because of some factor that may simply make them statistically more likely to harm others.

Really. Interesting. How about those on the Do Not Fly lists? How about those held in Guantanamo because someone turned them in for a US Army Reward? How about those sex offenders on Megan's List?

This has to be intended as irony, humor. How else do we explain this:

Miss Hilton went to jail not for the drunken driving itself, but for driving again after her license was suspended. This, too, is an injustice.

After all, driver's licenses have nothing to do with safe driving. As anyone who's traveled Southern California freeways knows, having a license does not make one a competent driver. And there are plenty of people without a license who undoubtedly would be fine drivers. Even without licensing, you already have a much stronger incentive to drive safely than the government could ever provide: Your own life is at stake each time you get behind the wheel.

Ah, the credo of the righteous Libertarian. Responsibility rests with the person, to know what is right, and to know what is best for one's self. And the corollary to the driver's license analogy is, as expected, is gun registration. Not mentioned, indeed, but never far from the hearts of Libertarians.

This is just simple-minded foolishness. Following this logic, there is no need to ticket speeders, until they kill someone. There is no need to arrest someone waving a gun in public, until they shoot someone.

This is childish thinking, juvenile logic. But it's the OC Register, Libertarian beacon to the world. Or something.

No votes yet


Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

for both the writing and the thought process. The OC crowd aren't Libertarian in the Goldwater mold, but rather more what you might call Limousine Libertarians, they are all for individual liberties for the wealthy, and white, but not so much for the poor or people of color. And absolutely no problem with communalism if it feeds their corporatist interests – more streets, more highways, more water, more consumers, all good – or their own personal safety – big on “law and order” when that means sending petty drug dealers to prison for life but no need to bother with staffing the white collar crime division, and political corruption, please, not an issue, just the way things are done, business as usual, move along, nothing here to see.

Thanks, Steve, for reporting on this, someone should keep an eye on them. I myself can’t even pick up a copy of the Register, makes my fingers burn; to actually read it is to risk nausea for days. Many of us in the North would gladly cut SoCal loose as a separate state, and good riddance. We’ll keep our water, and they can keep the steady stream of disasters they send us as Governors. Unrealistic, I know, but a man can dream.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

kick you.

Afflicting us with an earworm IN A HEADLINE at this hour of the morning? And of all the California-based driving songs you had to pick that one??

You could have chosen "Dead Man's Curve." Or "Leader of the Pack." or "Little Old Lady From Pasadena." or "Till Your Daddy Takes the T-Bird Away". Or to get less coastal about it there is the classic "Hot Rod Lincoln." I'm sure other commenters can think of other nominees.

No argument with your basic thesis mind you. I used to tend a tad Libertarian myself in long lost foolish youth but I don't think even then I ever heard a claim made (by anybody over 16) that we should abolish driver's licenses fer gossakes.

Just better music. Please.

[wanders unsteadily down road, pounding head with rock to make repetitions of "she's gone to heaven so I got to be good" disperse from memory.]

Steve uses many logical fallacies, but if you carefully read his post, he offers nothing in the way of contrary evidence or objective rebuttal. His post amounts to nothing more than, "I know you are, but what am I?" If he has actual difficulties with the content of an article, I'd suggest that he provide a reasoned response instead.