Thursday, October 07, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
BEN AND BAWB'S BLOG- A blog of two brothers: published writers, gun nuts, former soldiers, and recovering Republicrats both. From the purple mountain majesties of Montana comes Bawb, bitterly clinging to God and his guns. From the fruited plain of Iowa comes Ben, a patriot Walter Mitty. Wielding the sacred power of the written word the way a three-year-old might wield his daddy's shotgun, these are their musings.*
5 comments:
Heh, works for me! I might be afraid some pissed-off rancher with a rifle might pop off a warning shot to those going "too fast" (which, isn't the limit closer to 80 in the "middle of nowhere" sections of highways?).
What? No red light cameras used to slow people down?
Common sense and friendly persuasion... hmmm. Might work, too.
We used to have a "reasonable and prudent" speed for existing road conditions as the speed limit.
Then some yahoo who got his umpteenth speeding tickets and was going to lose his license took it to court.
The judge ruled "reasonable and prudent" to be "un-Constitutionally vague".
So that leaves us with "Unconstitutionally strict"?
Laws are like locks on a door, it keeps an honest man, honest.
A dishonest man will break the law as easily as bypassing a locked door. If they're determined, they'll get in.
Probably the only time in the last 50 years where a judge "strictly" interpreted the Constitution.
Usually, in the hands of "justices", it's a "living document" sprouting all kinds of tentacles and nodules and oozing all over, randomly spewing out new "rights" while ignoring the real rights enumerated in the Constitution itself.
Post a Comment