     |
|
|
|
Detailed market commentary at The Market Ticker and Ticker Classics
(The Year 2012 In Review) Donations accepted; we offer GOLD ACCESS for enhanced privileges. T-Shirts, caps, coffee mugs? Click here. BlogTalkRadio - Mondays at 3:30 Central - Yes, TickerGuy has a radio show (kinda)  RSS available
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
|
||
| MarketTicker Forums Single Post Display (Show in context) |
User: Not logged on
|
| Top | Login | Control Panel | FAQ | Register | Logout |
| User Info | Liberty; entered at 2011-05-24 13:49:02 | |||
|
Mrbill Posts: 7840 Registered: 2008-10-19 North Carolina 
|
Karl wrote..This right to travel does not relieve me of liability. If I choose to go upon the waterway not knowing what I'm doing, and I injure or kill someone, or damage their property, I am fully liable for the harm I caused. You didn't address this at all. fisticuffs wrote..I would add that if signs that regulate traffic flow (stop signs, yield signs, lights at intersections, speed limits, etc.) are not unconstitutional then so too is a driver's test to ensure that one actually understands these signs/lights and knows how to follow them as a prerequisite to obtaining a license to drive. Why must a "license to drive" be the goal of showing you understand street signs? Street signs existed before drivers licenses were required everywhere. Something must have convinced people that they would be understood without threatening penalties for not passing some 20 question multiple choice test (that you can take many times). 2011-05-24 13:49:02
| |||