3 ms·

We could eliminate food inspection and driver's licenses. That would increase liberty, but I don't think most people would find the freedom worthy of the cost.

pigeonhole123 4y ago
Is anyone suggesting that?
- kittiepryde 4y ago
  Some libertarians are -- but I think they were trying to employ the slippery slope argument
  - mwint 4y ago
    The slope we’ve slid down so far has been very slippery indeed.
- Wowfunhappy 4y ago
  No, but I think GP’s point is that there will always be a tradeoff between personal liberty and safety. We can argue about where the line should be, but it needs to be drawn somewhere between the two extremes.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    But GP's OP is not saying there shouldn't be a line, rather that it is that line that will likely be crossed in guise of public safety to unburden us from the burden of having liberties. Food, water, stuff like that have potential to kill off everyone. Drunk drivers on the other hand are not likely to ever pose an existential threat. So I tend to agree with those who insist that, of course there must be regulation, there must be informed discussion, no we shall not consult the i-ching, but definitely loss of liberties require an exceptionally high public good threshold to be considered. tldr; to keep that line in an optimal space between the extremes, clearly two opposing forces are necessary.
- polski-g 4y ago
  Oh such a classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZITP93pqtdQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZITP93pqtdQ
uup 4y ago
Both you and the GP are suggesting slippery slopes. I think it’s reasonable to think that checking every single driver, every single time they drive, for alcohol use is an invasion of privacy, especially since the vast, vast majority of drivers are not driving drunk. That also doesn’t mean privacy is dead or that it’s time to end food inspection.
fallingknife 4y ago
What do driver's licenses add to safety? The only people they prevent from driving are someone who is crazy enough to drive a car without knowing how, but draws the line at driving without government approval.
- TrueSlacker0 4y ago
  If you had to do continuing education to renew your license every X years then it may add to safety. But as it exists today it seems to be more of a form of ID than anything to do with a vehicle. When someone gets hired at a new job (USA) a drivers license can be used as a part to show citizenship, which has nothing to do with driving.
lancepioch 4y ago
People who want to drive and don't have licenses (whether by their choice or not) are currently driving on the roads right now. Also some of the worst drivers I've ever seen all do have their driver's license. While what you're saying does seem to make sense, sometimes the situation isn't always that simple.

pigeonhole123 4y ago

Is anyone suggesting that?

kittiepryde 4y ago
Some libertarians are -- but I think they were trying to employ the slippery slope argument
- mwint 4y ago
  The slope we’ve slid down so far has been very slippery indeed.
Wowfunhappy 4y ago
No, but I think GP’s point is that there will always be a tradeoff between personal liberty and safety. We can argue about where the line should be, but it needs to be drawn somewhere between the two extremes.
- eternalban 4y ago
  But GP's OP is not saying there shouldn't be a line, rather that it is that line that will likely be crossed in guise of public safety to unburden us from the burden of having liberties. Food, water, stuff like that have potential to kill off everyone. Drunk drivers on the other hand are not likely to ever pose an existential threat. So I tend to agree with those who insist that, of course there must be regulation, there must be informed discussion, no we shall not consult the i-ching, but definitely loss of liberties require an exceptionally high public good threshold to be considered. tldr; to keep that line in an optimal space between the extremes, clearly two opposing forces are necessary.
polski-g 4y ago
Oh such a classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZITP93pqtdQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZITP93pqtdQ

uup 4y ago

Both you and the GP are suggesting slippery slopes. I think it’s reasonable to think that checking every single driver, every single time they drive, for alcohol use is an invasion of privacy, especially since the vast, vast majority of drivers are not driving drunk. That also doesn’t mean privacy is dead or that it’s time to end food inspection.

fallingknife 4y ago

What do driver's licenses add to safety? The only people they prevent from driving are someone who is crazy enough to drive a car without knowing how, but draws the line at driving without government approval.

TrueSlacker0 4y ago
If you had to do continuing education to renew your license every X years then it may add to safety. But as it exists today it seems to be more of a form of ID than anything to do with a vehicle. When someone gets hired at a new job (USA) a drivers license can be used as a part to show citizenship, which has nothing to do with driving.

lancepioch 4y ago

People who want to drive and don't have licenses (whether by their choice or not) are currently driving on the roads right now. Also some of the worst drivers I've ever seen all do have their driver's license. While what you're saying does seem to make sense, sometimes the situation isn't always that simple.