When they start acting in away that endangers me on the road pull them over for reckless driving.
...as has already been posted...... if you're doing something that affects ONLY YOU, then have at it. HOWEVER, when you or anyone else assumes the potential to adversely affect me, mine or others, then you become a threat.....
Wanna ride along in an ambulance and dig bodies out of a vehicle where the driver was texting, or talking ? I can set it up for you.
That sounds very similar to what a lot of anti-gun people say. Oh my god he has a gun he COULD shoot someone. Does myself having a gun adversely effect you in any material way? Not in my opinion. Does it have the potential to adversely effect you, yours, or others? I'm going to have to say yes. Am I going to go out and rob, rape and murder? No. Should I be locked up because I have the potential to do so? Again no.
That sounds very similar to what a lot of anti-gun people say. Oh my god he has a gun he COULD shoot someone. Does myself having a gun adversely effect you in any material way? Not in my opinion. Does it have the potential to adversely effect you, yours, or others? I'm going to have to say yes. Am I going to go out and rob, rape and murder? No. Should I be locked up because I have the potential to do so? Again no.
After reading the last couple of posts I'm not sure I know what the point was or is. What does field stripping your weapon have to do with anything in this thread?
I thought the thread was debating seat belt laws and eventually into cell phone bans while driving. Somewhere along the way that "morphed" into the debate about the differences between two ideas as one being a victim less crime while the other potentially involves others. I was made the point of saying that just because some people may drive recklessly while on the phone, doesn't mean everyone does.
Of course there are laws made because allowing people to do XYZ could endanger others. Driving over the speed limit, unsafe lane changes etc. But an extreme would be how about making it illegal for women to wear provocative clothing while in public as I find this distracting and she would be making an unsafe driving condition for me. This is of course absurd and I believe all of us could agree on this.
So the real answer is somewhere in the middle between laws that most of agree we should have to keep the public safe and a made up law like I just mentioned is the point where people say, "I'm ok with these laws, but I'm not willing to give up this freedom so my neighbor feels secure. (Can I get an amen from the 2nd Admendment crowd?!) I believe that was part of the point that Timjoebillybob was trying to make. (If not I apologize for putting words in your mouth.) And is is certainly the point that I'm making. You and I might have to disagree on where that middle is.
I personally believe that you can't pass enough laws to bring about commonsense, but by trying you restrict the freedoms of those that already have common sense.
Why just this morning I was driving down the highway with no seat belt on smoking a cigarette while texting my brother about how I was simultaneously Shooting my handgun at street signs and my wife had the nerve to call me irresponsible!
Foolish response.
Stick to the point. IF you field strip your handgun while driving, then you DO pose a threat to anyone else on the road. I've probably been dealing with and legally carrying firearms longer than you've been breathing. Anything make your opinion more valid than mine?..... other than being off-topic?
I believe that was part of the point that Timjoebillybob was trying to make. (If not I apologize for putting words in your mouth.)
Why would field striping my handgun, be a threat to others?
while driving
Yeah yeah yeah. You just wanna be my friend so you can borrow money!
Why not have them without a seatbelt on and possibly never be able to sue?
READ.....
And who introduced the firearms into a thread about seatbelts ?