Libertarians Want To Legalize Drunk Driving

I can’t believe there are people out there who want to legalize drunk driving. Do a we search for “Libertarians Legalize Drunk Driving” and pages and pages of articles come up. Here are a couple:

How do you Libertarians rationalize this in your heads?

The minor and extremely insignificant freedom this would allow you is completely overwhelmed by the fact that you could easily kill someone.

So, to all you social Libertarians here is a question:

When a police officer sees and confirms through a breathalyzer that a driver is drunk should the police officer just let the person back into their car to drive off?

Yeah, this is not going to happen…:roll_eyes:

1 Like

This is why lolbertarians will never be taking seriously. They have gone harder to the left than the Democrats. It’s a shame because they used to be the party that was focused on liberty and the constitution. Now they are nothing but open border globalists who hate society.

1 Like

I’ve literally never heard of this.

I assume someone would be retarded enough to suggest it, but I’ve never heard it ever seriously proposed

1 Like

Of course you are taking a convoluted subject and reducing it to something that sounds absurd. Two points. We have removed ourselves from the rights and responsibilities of guiding and affecting the conduct of people in our communities… We no longer have freedom of association… or disassociating as the case may be. A town drunk use to be dealt with in various ways by all members of the community through denial of service and general rejection and by certain others with a helping hand and guidance. Today that responsibility has been removed from the community and given to the government… Not a particularly libertarian point of view.

What precisely is being criminalized? Not bad driving. Not destruction of property. Not the taking of human life or reckless endangerment. The crime is having the wrong substance in your blood. Yet it is possible, in fact, to have this substance in your blood, even while driving, and not commit anything like what has been traditionally called a crime.

The point that directly addresses this case is that we have also turned over to the government the right to prejudge people and fine, incarcerate and with asset forfeiture confiscated property before a person actually harms anyone else.

While you may see this instance as ludicrous… it only reinforces the government’s right to pre-emptively inject itself in anyone’s life for any reason that it sees justified. We see it with people leaving there children in the back yard to play, children setting up a lemonade stand… No one is harms, no one is hurt but we how far are we to allow the government to pre-emptively arrest someone… lots of people have firearms and every loaded gun has a potential victim… How far do you want your government to go to ‘protect’ you?

2 Likes

Legalizing drunk driving is absolutely absurd.

That said, how it’s dealt with needs some reworking. There’s a big difference between .08 and something like .24 and both shouldn’t be punished the same.

1 Like

You will get a kick out of this. My cousin got arrested a few months ago at a security checkpoint for DUI. Problem is, he blew a 0.00 and passed the field tests. Apparently they thought he must be on drugs. So they took him to the station and gave him a drug test. Then they suspended his license and prosecuted him, despite passing both the alcohol and drug test.

Anyway, he’s been posting long updates on Facebook about the incident (one was 9000+ words). He refuses to take any counter action against the police, even though he literally did nothing. He won’t file a complaint or write to his congressman or anything, basically falling back on the notion that “they won’t care because I’m white”.

What’s happening to men today? Won’t anyone stand up for themselves anymore?

No, what has been criminalized is having sufficient levels of alcohol in your blood to negatively affect motor skills, sight, and judgement making the drunk driver a lethal threat to everyone near them on the road.

Did he not even hire a lawyer?

If he passed both the alcohol and drug tests there’s not even probable cause to charge him.

There have been departments caught running illegal DUI stings like what is described and those who fought them with atty’s won and eventually won huge judgement in the civil suits that followed as well as putting quite a few of the cops in prison and many more fired.

By that logic there should be no laws for any reckess or deadly conduct as long as no one is directly harmed.

You’d be fine I suppose with people randomly shooting into playgrounds and parks filled with kids as long as no one was hit by the gunfire? Right?