I think you have "my right" and "my choice" mixed up.

Is it a "right" if your still charged for speeding, for trespassing, for possesion of stolen goods?

Everything you listed is a choice made by an individual, not an expected right.

Furthermore there are too many laws for everything... law to take away from the rights of others specifically.

We aren't a truly democratic country, and that isn't lost on a lot of people. The validity of a lot of laws can be called into question as a result.

Look at the validity of the HST for example, via the recent election and its debates (or lack there of)....

Now we need a license to take the 12'foot aluminum out for the day? Soon everything in how you live will be legislated, and you'll be a criminal simply for being alive... probably are already... so in an individualist society overrun with socialist laws you will have those folks that determine their own moral compass and express there free will to live regardless of how some bureaucrat thinks things should be ordered.

Get used to it, because there is likely to be more of it the way the world is going. There is little apatite from the informed thinking people to chase down (or submit to) petty infractions when serious crimes and serious criminals are on the loose in society wrecking real havoc to our lives and way of life with virtual impunity.

Also buying stolen goods has no relation to 'rights'... buying stolen goods is a recognized crime by all if doing so knowingly. If a person knowingly buys stolen goods then they know they have committed a crime not that they have more rights or any rights in regards to their transaction. I fail to follow Ben's logic on that one.

And speed limits IMO are like guidelines when the difference in vehicular performance is factored in. Some vehicles handle better and are safer at 20kmph above the speed limit than others on the same road are at 20kmph below the speed limit. Thats the biggest reason why people drive at different speeds.

Its like saying all doorways should be 5'6" high and 18" wide because thats the size of the average person and therefore everyone should conform....

The biggest reason people drive at different speeds is because they believe their vehicle handles better or worse? I disagree. People speed because they are in a hurry. People speed because they think they are above the law. People speed because they care nothing about the person they may be cutting off or putting in danger. (the same holds true for those drivers who drive too slow, putting others in danger) The fact is, speeding is against the law and if you are speeding, you are breaking that law. It can't work for one and not the other.
I don't understand how any car can be deemed safer travelling 20km over the speed limit. I'm sure that same car is just as safe travelling at the speed limit.

With any "rights" comes individual "responsibility". We have to be held accountable personally for our own choices. When you try to separate the two, and make the responsibility "collective" instead of "individual" you've just given up your "rights". Or more likely, nowadays, unwittingly had them taken from you.

Systems were made for man. Not man for systems. And as soon as the "rights" of the group, any group "collectively" , are elevated in importance above the "rights" of the "individuals" that comprise that group, those individuals are able to avoid personal responsibility for their actions by shifting the blame for them onto others.

Gotta agree with you on that one, Thunder.
metalman.

Eagleone says you'll be a criminal simply for being alive... Since you breath out C02 you are a criminal in some money grabbing circles.

"I don't understand how any car can be deemed safer travelling 20km over the speed limit."

Sigh. Comprehension is a skill. Read the post again. Eagle said that some cars are safer travalling at 20km over the limit than others. For example, a new sports car vs. an old clunker.

This all brings about the question: If many citizens don't believe a law is justifiable or reasonable, do they have a right in a free society to oppose that law?

Are we to bend over and take whatever the government decides is the law, or can we tell the government that that law is untenable?

I am under the impression that government is for the people. That means a law must be for the protection of individuals safety and security without impinging on freedom to choose.

We scream about how the government is taxing us too hard. The government says that it is to continue the same level of service or better. Then we have a story as was brought to us yesterday about how the enforcement industry has become an industry where laws were created to feed the coffers. There has also been a hew and cry about the cost of the Olympics and who actually benefits.

So, are we mere fodder for the wealthy with an illusion of freedom? Is Alex Jones a total nut job or is he absolutely correct?

There are some very knowledgeable and intelligent poster on this site. What is the truth?

Well said, Thunder! Speed limits are set by traffic engineers to allow traffic to flow at a reasonable rate without threatening the safety of people.

They must be obeyed ALL drivers. This has absolutely nothing to do with how fast a car can travel versus how fast another make of car can travel on the same stretch of road. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

It also has nothing to do with democracy, personal choices and freedoms, civil rights, the Olympics, the HST or Gordon Campbell and Carole James.

It is all about a traffic law abiding society. If people choose not to obey traffic laws which exist for the safety of society as a whole, what other laws do they think are superfluous and therefore to be simply ignored or broken at random?

Don't tell me: All I have to do watch the nightly TV news about the latest drug busts, arsons, kidnappings, shootings, fatal car crashes....etc.

Speed limits are NOT set by traffic engineers. ALL traffic laws are set by the government at its various levels. Traffic engineers do make recommendations, but in the end politicians decide and implement what ever they want, dam the populace! Read the Montana experiment a couple articles ago.

They will make a modest effort to convince every gullible citizen that it is for safety, or economy, but you can be sure that one or more of their buddies are getting something.

STOP THE MADNESS! QUIT BELIEVING THE TRIPE SPEWED BY POLITICIANS! They are in the business of governing (yes it is) for their own benefit and they benefit most by catering to big finance.

We are having every little freedom stripped from us and we a letting them do it. At the same time, the government and their enforcement arm is unable to prevent or catch the biggest criminals doing the greatest harm to us individually and as a society. So they take the quick and easy win by implementing laws that turn individualists into criminals for minor events. In Taiwan you go to jail for chewing gum in public. Is that what "we" want? A totalitarian regime dictating every behavior and action? People are supposed to have the freedom to choose, and to pay the consequences of an action. If you drive fast and crash, you don't get covered by insurance and would be liable for any damage to another person's property. If you cause someone elses injury or death, you become responsible for their commitments.

It's no use to split hairs about who determines safe speed limits and who has the final say.

In an orderly society there must be certain rules or there will be no order, only chaos.

Do we object to following the rule to drive in the right hand lane as opposed to Britain where they must drive on the left?

I enjoy all the freedoms that we have and my full enjoyment does not require breaking something as basic and necessary as a speed limit (as dictated by ideal road conditions).

If one must reach a certain destination by a certain time one can make sure to leave early enough to get there with time to spare - without speeding, tailgating, passing on double lines and other illegal highway acrobatics.

If one can not accomplish that one may consider taking a bus, a train or a plane and leave the driving or piloting to more sensible people.

In an orderly society there must be certain rules or there will be no order, only chaos.

That I agree with. What I don't agree with is the incessant creation of absurd minutia laws. To legislate everything and to leave no choice is totalitarian. A law on how to drive and how to walk and what to wear, absolute absurdity.

They are considering a law in France to forbid the burqa. I know it is supposed to address the oppression of women and to mitigate Muslim integration, but to create a law? The thing is that the burqa is a traditional garb from that region of the world that has become predominately Muslim. What if it were decided that while driving it was forbidden to wear any head cover? It is the law so one must obey. They could and would spout all kinds of propaganda to sell it to at least a few gullible citizens, then it would be entrenched in our culture. Sounds about as absurd as an arbitrary speed limit of 50 KM/h on a major thorough fare yet here we are allowing a few to strip away every perception of freedom with nary an objection because the head cheese said so.

I am not sorry to say that I will not capitulate nor surrender my every freedom and will continue to object to excessive government and rule. It is my right, not as a citizen or even human, but as a living creature to resist assimilation and seek freedom. To do otherwise is to be nothing more than a zoo pet for the extremely wealthy using {public} money for private entertainment.

This thread is amusing. Personally I think many people in our society really have a hard time grasping what freedom really means. It's sort of akin to the average old or middle aged white guy complaining about "reverse racism" and how he's being screwed by it, LOL.

Well, I don't share your opinion that every least bit of freedom of choice is being stripped away from us.

Far from it. You can choose your profession, where to work and where to live, what to eat and what to buy, what to read and what to watch, who to vote for or not vote at all, where to take your vacation or to stay at home, you can choose to have a religion or not to have any religion at all, etc. etc.

When you get a life sentence you can expect to get parole after only seven years if you are well behaved and for some quite serious offences you can expect to get only a minor slap on the wrist...

You can even lobby your MLA and the government to raise speed limits if you think that they do not make sense.

I would hardly call that kind of society totalitarian.

Speed limit discussions are perhaps the best forum for hypocracy known to man (with the possible exception of traffic cameras). It seems a lot of folks want to ignore some laws and see others strictly enforced. Generally we all think we are above certain laws.
Personally I do speed sometimes. I have no illusions however, that i deserve to do so because my vehicle handles like a dream and i have not caused an accident in 30 odd years of driving. I just get impatient sometimes. All engineering aside, i think you will find it a lot easier to avoid that big bull moose that charges out of the bush (or the grouse that flies into your path) If you are NOT going 120. More to the point, from the driving i see these days i think a lot of folks are overestimating their abilities (and maybe their vehicles).
Respect the law and accept the fact that you are in the wrong when you break it. Stop making rediculous excuses and rationalizations. Breaking the law is one thing (we are all human after all). Pretending that you are justified in doing so is the first step towards chaos.

"Freedom" is "the ability of the individual to choose or refuse one thing at a time."

And, yes, it is being continually eroded by governments.

Sometimes necessarily, to our greater overall benefit, such as in the enforcement of speed limits and deciding on which side of the road we will drive.

For these things definitely affect the safe use of a motor vehicle. Not only for the person driving it, but for others who may be using the roads, too.

By insisting on having some "right" to speed, or cross over into a lane of oncoming traffic to pass anytime we choose, we are denying the "rights" of others to use the road with a modicum of personal safety.

But all too often nowadays governments also invade areas of
our "rights" where there is NO denial of the "rights" of anyone else involved by our exercise of them.

For instance, we are supposed to have the "right" to Freedom of Speech. Limiting this, as it properly should be limited, is the "right" of anyone we speak against who feels they have in some way been harmed by what we've said or written to sue us for slander or libel if what we say is untrue.


The defence of our Freedom of Speech "right" would then hinge on our using this "right" with "responsibility", and our being able to prove the truth of what we have said or written if challenged in a Court of Law to do so.

But if government says, "We can't AFFORD to have our Court system tied up with slander and libel cases, where people are trying to prove the "truth" or un-truth" of what was said, we'll let a "Tribunal" or a "Commission" or a "Board" decide if there was any harm done or not, because this will SAVE THE TAXPAYERS A LOT OF MONEY," then we are letting government say to us all, "Truth is no defence". And your "right" to Freedom of Speech has just gone.

It doesn't matter whether what you say when you exercise your freedom to say it
is "true" or not, if someone else feels they've been harmed in any way by your saying it, even if it may be
true, you aren't going to ever get the chance to prove it. So shut your mouth, or we'll penalize you.

We have all kinds of similar examples to this in a vast array of areas today. Where the cost "in money" takes precedence over the protection of our "rights", or denies them to us.

True freedom!

http://www.utilikilts.com/?page_id=10

Laws (including speed limits) are in place for stupid, selfish people, who would otherwise (and in a lot of cases who do it anyway) do what they want at a cost they don't end up paying.

The fact that we apparently need an increasing amount of "guidance" doesn't speak well about people at all.

Just think, there is a speed limit of 50kmh in place on third avenue between Victoria and Queensway.

I suspect that during the day, very few drive at that speed or higher; most probably drive around 40, if not slower.

I also think that those people who drive slower than the actual speed limit seem not to fall under Jimmi's category of "stupid and selfish". I prefer to think of them as people who understand the notion of driving at a speed that is appropriate to the conditions.

If we agree that the speeds on 3rd are as I suggest, and it is because people do drive carefully and to the conditions they find on the road, what is it that makes those same people flaunt the law, throw care to the wind, and drive faster than 50 on 5th once they get to the west side of Ahbau?

Governments are always passing new legislation, and for good reason. God forbid that the day should come when they say **Our work here is done** and then lay themselves and their Civil Servants off.

Our freedoms are being chipped away little by little, and people barely notice. A lot of the laws are assinine and are not enforced, however they are there if the police choose to use them.

Seatbelt legislation, and helmet legislation is just to mention a few. They always have the stats to indicate how many lives were saved by seatbelts, however they never issue any stats on how many people were killed because of seat belts.

The Government could pay people to wear seatbelts, and stop paying them if they are found not wearing them. This would work fine, however it would cost the Government money, so its better to fine people for not wearing them, and make some money.

Helmet laws are enforced primarily around the Greater Victoria area, and pretty well ignored in the rest of the Province. (No money to be made by enforcing the Helmet law, as the fine is only $29.00)

A town in the State of Kansas a few years ago passed a bylaw banning firearms within the City limits. A town a few miles down the road passed a bylaw requiring all citizen to own a firearm. The reason they did that was to show that any Government anywhere, at anytime can pass stupid legislation.

Only idiots and fools disregard posted speed limits and drive foolishly on our highways endangering the lives of others.