** Federal Blackmail and Seatbelts **
In Vermont, not wearing one’s seatbelt is currently a ‘secondary offense’ meaning that one cannot be pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt, but if one is pulled over for something else and the officer finds one is not wearing a seatbelt, its ticket-able.
The Fed wants to make it a ‘primary offense’, they want it to be something that one can be pulled over for. Vermont, for whatever reason, wants it to remain a secondary offense. Kudos. I agree.
Now the Fed is threatening to withhold highway funds for the state because of this. Blackmail. They take our money and force laws down our throats with threats to not give us back our own goddamn money that they took. Fuckers. No other word.
The 10th amendment, a ‘quaint’ amendment to say the least states simply, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” I don’t recall the constitution saying anything about seatbelts, do you?
Furthermore, the highways are for citizen use, but also for military use. God forbid they need to move military around on those roads. Whose fault is it going to be if Vermont tells the Fed to screw off and the highways fall into disrepair? The Air National Guard in Vermont run the airborne patrols of the entire eastern seaboard… There is also a lot of radar and other installations in the rural areas of northern Vermont. Furthermore, if Vermont stands up for itself and funds its own highway maintenance, can they then tell the Fed to screw off when they want to use the highways? Probably not. A joke.
The question is this: When the hell are politicians going to realize that we do not elect them because we think they know the best way for us to run our own lives? We elect politicians to preserve and protect our ability to run our own lives, however poorly we do so. That’s freedom!
Oh, and apparently some uber-Dem just got a little banged up while not wearing a seatbelt. I'm pretty sure New Jersey, where one needs a letter from the sheriff to buy a BB gun (literally, look it up), classifies not wearing a seatbelt as a 'primary offense'. Typical hypocrite action? Does the Governor have some overriding desire to not wear his seatbelt? To exert his freedom he should have but doesn't? Or is it merely thinking one is above the law?
**Update:** Here's an editorial from a local 'flaming Dem'. Notice the chauvinism. He clearly knows whats best for everyone.
Its bad enough one can't even buy a car nowadays that doesn't beep or flash if you don't buckle up... now this.
The Fed wants to make it a ‘primary offense’, they want it to be something that one can be pulled over for. Vermont, for whatever reason, wants it to remain a secondary offense. Kudos. I agree.
Now the Fed is threatening to withhold highway funds for the state because of this. Blackmail. They take our money and force laws down our throats with threats to not give us back our own goddamn money that they took. Fuckers. No other word.
The 10th amendment, a ‘quaint’ amendment to say the least states simply, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” I don’t recall the constitution saying anything about seatbelts, do you?
Furthermore, the highways are for citizen use, but also for military use. God forbid they need to move military around on those roads. Whose fault is it going to be if Vermont tells the Fed to screw off and the highways fall into disrepair? The Air National Guard in Vermont run the airborne patrols of the entire eastern seaboard… There is also a lot of radar and other installations in the rural areas of northern Vermont. Furthermore, if Vermont stands up for itself and funds its own highway maintenance, can they then tell the Fed to screw off when they want to use the highways? Probably not. A joke.
The question is this: When the hell are politicians going to realize that we do not elect them because we think they know the best way for us to run our own lives? We elect politicians to preserve and protect our ability to run our own lives, however poorly we do so. That’s freedom!
Oh, and apparently some uber-Dem just got a little banged up while not wearing a seatbelt. I'm pretty sure New Jersey, where one needs a letter from the sheriff to buy a BB gun (literally, look it up), classifies not wearing a seatbelt as a 'primary offense'. Typical hypocrite action? Does the Governor have some overriding desire to not wear his seatbelt? To exert his freedom he should have but doesn't? Or is it merely thinking one is above the law?
**Update:** Here's an editorial from a local 'flaming Dem'. Notice the chauvinism. He clearly knows whats best for everyone.
This bill will save lives and prevent injuries. Education is not enough. New Hampshire's House of Representatives understood that when its members passed a primary seat belt law last week.Oh thanks, Rep. Chen. I know lots of things that may save lives and/or prevent injuries too... doesn't mean all of them should be made laws. If we lock up every Vermont resident in a padded room, it will clearly save lives and prevent injuries... it doesn't then follow we should make it a law. Notice he says its not enough just to educate us and let us decide. It must be forced. He knows better than all of us.
Some legislators worry that Vermonters will object to this bill, considering it an unnecessary intrusion. Poll after poll proves otherwise. Americans and Vermonters favor initiatives such as standard enforcement of our seat belt law.Oh, the polls. Who gives a shit? It is an unnecessary intrusion. Clearly. I know Mr. Chen. I am cordial with him, however he DOES NOT GET MY VOTE AND NEVER HAS.
Its bad enough one can't even buy a car nowadays that doesn't beep or flash if you don't buckle up... now this.
