Even Bigger Brother

Should government enforce the needs of private enterprise and special interests.

  • Yes, I enjoy seeing my fees go to France.

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • No, government has more important matters to tend to.

    Votes: 21 95.5%

  • Total voters
    22

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
45,724
11,186
113
MADD has successfully lobbied the government to lower the blood/alcohol level for drivers. You cannot renew your liscence sticker without auto insurance and your 407 bill is in arrears. Is it the government's role to protect the needs of private enterprise and special interest groups?
 
I suspect that the desires of MADD and the government are the same in reducing blood alchohol levels.

As far as the 407 is concerned I suspect that this was one of the terms of the sale when the government pocketed $3.5 billion. Why would a purchaser pay that much if they didn't have a means of collection that was fairly effective.
 
Insidious Von said:
MADD has successfully lobbied the government to lower the blood/alcohol level for drivers. You cannot renew your liscence sticker without auto insurance and your 407 bill is in arrears. Is it the government's role to protect the needs of private enterprise and special interest groups?
I thought that is what the courts were designed to do? If there is a breach of contract, or one party owes another money, a law suit is made and brought to court where it is decided (who and if) there is a guilty party.

Government should just stay the fuck away from private matters. Everything runs better without government intervention.
 
Was driving on Highway 10 going north a few years ago. Road was wet and slippery. See a OPP cruiser up ahead with flashing lights on. Start to slow down, car finally comes to a stop about three feet from the OPP. The cop is in the middle of the road. I ask him why are you stopping traffic? The cop tells me they are handing out information about MADD. This is taking place about 5.30 in the evening with rush hour in full effect. Sometimes you wonder.
 
great bear said:
Was driving on Highway 10 going north a few years ago. Road was wet and slippery. See a OPP cruiser up ahead with flashing lights on. Start to slow down, car finally comes to a stop about three feet from the OPP. The cop is in the middle of the road. I ask him why are you stopping traffic? The cop tells me they are handing out information about MADD. This is taking place about 5.30 in the evening with rush hour in full effect. Sometimes you wonder.

Unless that was New Year's Eve that was just plain stupid of the OPP.
 
great bear said:
Was driving on Highway 10 going north a few years ago. Road was wet and slippery. See a OPP cruiser up ahead with flashing lights on. Start to slow down, car finally comes to a stop about three feet from the OPP. The cop is in the middle of the road. I ask him why are you stopping traffic? The cop tells me they are handing out information about MADD. This is taking place about 5.30 in the evening with rush hour in full effect. Sometimes you wonder.
that would have made me mad
 
MADD getting the limits lowered will do nothing to deter the truly stupid. What this does is stop regular people, responsible adults, from having a beer or glass of wine at dinner while out of their residence. The drunks though, well they'll still be behind the wheel, probably without a valid license and insurance. Man I feel safe already. :rolleyes:
 
dirkd101 said:
MADD getting the limits lowered will do nothing to deter the truly stupid. What this does is stop regular people, responsible adults, from having a beer or glass of wine at dinner while out of their residence. The drunks though, well they'll still be behind the wheel, probably without a valid license and insurance. Man I feel safe already. :rolleyes:

Exactly. This is only going to result in responsible adults getting punished (with absolutely no possible method of appeal), and possibly losing their livelyhood because of a 0.05 roadside reading (using a portable, roadside, and possibly uncalibrated device).
 
dirkd101 said:
MADD getting the limits lowered will do nothing to deter the truly stupid. What this does is stop regular people, responsible adults, from having a beer or glass of wine at dinner while out of their residence. The drunks though, well they'll still be behind the wheel, probably without a valid license and insurance. Man I feel safe already. :rolleyes:
it will be for the economy too.
 
destillat said:
Exactly. This is only going to result in responsible adults getting punished (with absolutely no possible method of appeal), and possibly losing their livelyhood because of a 0.05 roadside reading (using a portable, roadside, and possibly uncalibrated device).

There is a whole thread on this subject already but a truly responsible adult wouldn't drink at all and then drive home......

If one's licence and livelihood is so important then they have nothing to worry about because they won't risk losing both.....

I will also repeat what I've been saying all along:

They went after the smokers and sooner or later will go after something else, and here it is folks.....just like I said they would and no one listened then.......

Next up? Fast Food...that's my prediction.
 
The auto insurance requirement is a big one for me.

When I migrated to Canada, I found I I needed to have such insurance to buy a car. I asked at the license centre - please privide the name of the government agency that supplies auto insurance.There isn't one, you need to buy from a private company, was the reply.

WTF, I wish I could get it legislated that someone had to buy from my company in order to obtain some piece of govermnet paper. Never heard of anything so stupid in all my life.

If the government legislate for it, they should also provide a service to supply it!
 
needinit said:
The auto insurance requirement is a big one for me.

When I migrated to Canada, I found I I needed to have such insurance to buy a car. I asked at the license centre - please privide the name of the government agency that supplies auto insurance.There isn't one, you need to buy from a private company, was the reply.

WTF, I wish I could get it legislated that someone had to buy from my company in order to obtain some piece of govermnet paper. Never heard of anything so stupid in all my life.

If the government legislate for it, they should also provide a service to supply it!

Well, actually, there is a LOT of legislation written to protect others from everyone else.

I mean, they legislated cars needing catalytic converters but they don't make those.

They legislated controlled dumping of toxins into our water supply but they don't make facilities to treat those toxins.

There are all kinds of building codes that must be met but they don't make any of the items IN those codes (ie: the correct gauge of wire to be run to x outlets). A home also needs to have 1 working toilet before you can get occupancy but they don't make toilets

I mean hell, they even legislated the need to wear seatbelts but they don't make seatbelts.

To complain that the government requires us to have something and not provide that something is just ludicrous....
 
Here's the latest cash grab - they are considering banning right hand turns on red lights. In some intersections with blind angles this is a nessecity and there are designated signs to warn you. However on intersections with clear sights of vision this is just another punative fine.

I get it, we are no longer allowed to drive. Where is the new public transport infrastructure to deal with commuters?