Ok I’ll play too:

“It still boggles the mind how 16 other cars can be “legally” impounded that weren’t involved.”

Standard collective guilt of a group. It’s part of the general shift of this society away from the notion of the individual.

“It’s not how any of this works.”

Nobody cares because the laws were passed to use on those “bad people” over there. When it happens to regular “good people” the worst that happens is a human interest story on the news and the government fixes their “error” if the public outcry is enough. So long as the public relations game is played right and the…

The impounding was likely accomplished under a California law that was passed I think around ‘08. At the time I stated it was a law designed for abuse. I was called “paranoid” and the rest of course. The law would only be used on bad people, street racers and the like, never on good people. Quickly there were was one…

For 1973 the 5mph bumper was required on the front only. The early 70s designs persisted through most of the decade but were modified as the regulations came about. As a result many late 70s cars these days are simply modified to appear like their early 70s versions.

There are a few 70s designs that are hideous in…

Most cars of the 1970s were as good looking as any other era until the 1974 5mph bumper requirement for both ends came into effect. Then all the designs had these hideous bumpers put on them. 90+% of the time some big ugly chrome thing, big black rubber things, or both.

Today instead of fat bumpers we now have fat…

I understand reality quite well, it’s you who doesn’t. If you and others believe those who run government grant you things, allow you to live, allow you to keep something of what you earn as the reality, then it’s you who’s “FUCKED”. That belief makes you livestock. Human resources to serve their ends. To live, to…

Another crappy gawker article... You will never see hydraulic jack fail like that in use. Hydraulic systems fail by leaking. Like all pressure vessels they follow the leak-before-break rule. They leak, the pressure releases. Some systems have check valves, mechanical locks, and other designs as fail safes against…

When you can’t formulate an argument just fling out the insults and ridicule for not having the enlightened views we are told by our betters to have. Why don’t you try thinking for your self? It’s a fair bit harder than relying on massa, but try it sometime.

If you think everything flows from the state, rights,…

Again, since you can’t figure it out, the question was posed, why do people drive drunk? I answered it. Understanding some of the reasoning behind something isn’t endorsing it. I know lots of people are too mentally impaired to grasp simple logic like that but at least give it a try.

Furthermore, I’m going to wager…

You came back at me that driving is privilege so you opened the discussion. And it is a philosophical one that gets right to the heart of self ownership. What has effectively come about is a result of perception. People have the perception that government grants privilege so it does. It’s a con like any other and so…

The question was posed. I offered one of the answers. It’s a very real answer for real life situations where people didn’t plan on drinking as much as they did and so on. And one can avoid the driver’s seat and sleep in the back and it’s still DUI.

A warning chime is not a guage. The analog here is the gear indicator, not the chime. However you understand that already and are merely playing a stupid game. One I can play too BTW.

So now you’re going into other threads with strawman nonsense by intentionally ignoring context. That context being the warnings for every little thing in the car, not traffic control devices external to the vehicle and gauges which simply report the condition.

Go read the first post I made in reply to your nonsense about things being designed to kill vs. things not designed to kill. Same subject. I haven’t changed it. The things are not the problem. The condition of the society is. You introduced the topics of social contracts and living off on one’s own, not I. You again…

You’re just being dismissive. You don’t want to deal with arguments I made. My arguments weren’t about “shootings” they are about violence. I made it very clear you can take all the guns away but you aren’t fixing the underlying problem. You can take more and more away but it won’t fix the problem. Cry slippery slope…

Oh don’t let the kids.... parental government right there in your words but you didn’t make a political argument?

You’re so conditioned you think a parental system of government is “common sense”. You can’t think of any other way of doing things but to offer up more of the same. Ban / restrict the things as if nobody…

On the contrary, you’re being insulting because _you_ have no rational argument or reasoning, just superficial and over simplified political view you get from your team. You can only repeat what you are told. This leaves you one option when presented with a argument that requires some thought, the social one of a 3rd…

“You say all that as if it doesn’t matter that somebody can buy a weapon that’s perfectly suited for killing dozens of people, and then go and kill dozens of people.”

I didn’t “say” anything of the sort. Maybe you need to learn some reading comprehension? I wrote that violence comes from people and societal conditions,…