This thread has turned into the "letters to the editorial" page of my local daily brainwashing rag. If I had a silver dime for every letter complaining about how people drive. I think do-gooders and nannies who presume to tell everyone what to do are the assholes. BTW, I don't fly a fighter jet but I think a Viper is capable of safely traversing at 120 mph on open highway and no traffic, although I would choose not to. In a car like a Mercedes you can do 100 and it feels and handles better than a Chevy at 65 mph.

That may be your opinion but it is not based on a libertarian stance. One may do as they wish so long as they do not cause harm to another or their property. Shooting through town (while not desirable for obvious reasons) does not cause harm in and of itself, therefore it is not a crime. The noise it creates may be a cause for litigation but startling people or causing them "to wonder what is going on" is not sufficient cause. This situation is different from the driving question because you can't move your house very easily, yet you can move your car quite easily. Saying that a fast driver disturbs you is no different than saying an obese person disturbs you or a naked person disturbs you or a black person disturbs you for that matter. To force others to conform to your personal driving standards (which are wholly arbitrary and likely inadequate) under threat of force is slavery. The highways are a public space and you assume the risk by using them like everyone else. If someone crashes into you, you then have cause for action. If not, you don't. You do not have the right to "feel safe". Feelings are a choice you make based on the lies you tell yourself and nearly nothing to do with the reality of the situation (think anything the government has ever said about children, guns or terrorism). You do not get to sue because you feel unsafe or unloved or unwanted or shitty after drinking too much beer at the local bar. To suggest harm has been done because of the feelings that *you* choose to have is absurd and a complete misunderstanding about emotions (which are purely subjective and illusory) and what harm is. Who cares what others would like to have done to them? How is this relevant? You do not get to control people. Do you honestly understand this? You keep trying to justify why controlling others is okay. It isn't. And your golden rule has a fatal flaw. If a person decides that might is right and it is survival of the fittest, take what you can before others do, and expects others to do the same, well, there goes your golden rule. it only works if people play nice. Clearly many don't. Just to repeat, you do not have the right to feel safe. Sorry but your law argument is just stupid. People know that what they are doing is wrong, they don't give a shit. Who doesn't know that you shouldn't steal? How do laws make any difference? Laws do not teach people that something is wrong. Laws are arbitrary instruments of punishment based on whim and agenda. Did Prohibition teach people that drinking alcohol was wrong? Was it wrong before it was banned? What about during? How about after? Same goes for Marijuana and pornography. Prostitution is legal in some places and illegal in others. is it only wrong in the places it is illegal? How does that make any difference? In the end you ended up admitting what I had already said, namely, that laws are an excuse to punish behavior. That there is a law does not make something wrong. BTW Don't mention Paul, if he existed, he was a fraud and a liar according to his own words and those attributed to Jesus in the Bible. Israel was hardly a prison? First, the covenant with Israel was based on bloodline not religious choice. Yahweh had been using selective breeding since Adam to produce his "chosen people". Secondly, this Yahweh (claiming to be god we are told, though it says no such thing in Hebrew) treats his chosen like an alcoholic father with a bad attitude. When he isn't abusing them for not following the dumbest rules one could imagine, the "god of love" is demanding child sacrifices, the genocide of other races (murdering women and children, let us be clear) and acting like a schizophrenic lunatic who requires death to appease his unlimited ego. You really need to look closely at the behavior of your "god" and stop using his claim of "godness" as an excuse for consistently immoral action. Start here http://www.thebyteshow.com/Audio/JosephPFarrell/JosephPFarrell_YahwehTheTwoFacedGod1_26Jan2012_TBS.mp3It really amuses me when people refer to the Bible as a source for any sort of standard for goodness or marriage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw) or conduct. The book is full of atrocious behavior, moreso from Yahweh than his humans.

Thanks for the response, Spirit. I put in the Scripture part to be provacative and I am glad someone rose up in response. I will return to the Bible and libertarianism in a moment....Back to the speeding thing, as it represents and important reality for people who really want to live free and that is we must live responsibly. Now, my opinion is that I may not responsibly take my high power rifle out and shoot around the neighborhood, even if I dont damage anything but a mound of dirt. The reason is my behaviour disturbs the peace of my neighbors who, as a libertarian, I am duty bound to respect. It costss them something (peace and quite at a minimun) to hear the shot and wonder what the heck is going on. If I am driving and Jeff passes me going 200 mph, that disturbs my peace, makes me feel unsafe where I should feel safe. That is a harm and his behavoir is cupable. (Quick Scriptural connection: Several references in Scripture are to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Having anyone driving 200 mph in CA is something I think a lot of people would not like having done to them.)Re law for the lawless: There are bad people, like bankders, for instance. They think mortage fraud is okay. The reason we have laws is because they need to be taught that fraud is wrong, and to be held accountable. A person who has right living writen in their heart and soul that fraud is wrong, they need no law. As a responsible person, they freely keep the right law that resides within, which creates civility. This is the point of the law being created for the lawless. Yes, the lawless break the law that should be obviously kept, therefore an external law must be stated so the lawless can be held accountable without resort to ignorance, i.e. ignorance of the law. (Again, the point of law for the lawless is Scriptural (Paul the Apostle) and worth understanding.)Back to Scripture: I recommend reading the entire Bible, front to back, with truly classic libertarian eyes. Take your Sabbath complaint. Ancient Israel was hardly a prision. If you disliked the Sabbath keeping and you wanted to live under a different god, then you travel a little north to Assyria or a little south to Egypt. Egypt was very cosmopolitan. But, if you wanted to be an Israelite, then Law and the Prophets were the rules. I am a military pilot like Kenny. When I volunteered for the Navy, I came under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I accepted the law of the military and then had to live by it. Same thing with Israel and Scripture. If you prefer another god, you are free to go. Now, as you read the Bible, keep these ideas in mind. The moral rules are pretty basic, e.g. do not give false testimony in court. Other rules are cultural cohesion rules that make the nation strong (when properly applied). And, again, you are always free to go 50 miles north or 50 miles south, and you can live according to your tastes. That is a whole lt easier than the expatriating and keeping property in foreign nations like we have to now just to live quietly and create something of value that others want to buy. I would take the social context (not the technical context) of Ancient Israel anyday compared to the prison we have now.Anyways, I love the libertarian brethern and simply encourage each to understand the great responsibility true libertarians have to live responsibly.... And also put in a plug for wisdom found in the Bible.Regards,Bob

I weigh in with Kenny on the high speed travel. I share the libertarian life model. Libertarians, though, are not islands and they live with others. The tradition of libertarians recognizes the needs for courts, because some people can not follow the simplest of common law. (Note that the most libertarian of books for the organization of a libertarian community are the Scriptures. Just a few rules, no regularion, only courts, dependence on the maturity of the members to control themselves. The book says that laws are made for the lawless, to teach them what is right and wrong.) Its disappointing that Jeff apparently is unable to see the disregard his speeding behavior expresses.... Or, maybe.... He doesn't care. And that is the crime. So my answer is, we (Kenny and I as common law respecting libertarisns) arrest Jeff, arraign him and we put him on trial before a jury of his peers who are to judge both the law, the facts and render a judgement.Regards,Bob

Kenny, there is no such thing as public endangerment, that is a socialist term if ever there was one. 2 A true libertarian respects the right to be an asshole and do things they would not do themselves. 3 "Polite society" is a euphemism for culturally controlled minds filled with bullshit. A real libertarian understands that if there is no harm, there is no foul. Almost and could and might do not enter the equation unless you are a socialist/fascist. If you aren't comfortable with someone driving 120mph then stay away from them, stay home, ride the bus.

The Perpetual Traveler... I am saving my money to try to get my DR residency started before the current US President is sworn in for his second term. Thanks for your help and guidance on the DR program. I look forward to becoming a TDV subscriber. BTW, that is pretty funny about the Speeding in Santa Monica with the CAN and DR driver's licenses.