Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander
You are rationalizing.
You see the need for highway speed limits, so you rationalize that they don't violate you Constitutional Rights.
You don't see the need for boating speed limits so you believe they violate your rights.
The issues are EXACTLY the same. The right of the state to set speed limits.
You said "as a society, we have decided to evoke speed limits" If the legislature passes HB847 and the Governor signs it into law, then we will have decided, as a society, to invoke boating speed limits.
|
All true above. Frankly people would be amazed at what little rights they actually have. Freedom of speech ... well not so much really ... political speech and artistic expression have been ruled protected but anything else falls under the will of the people. Think you have the right to marry the person you love .... ha !
So let's come to speed laws, be they on the lake on on land. What "we" want is reasonable limits should they be needed. It's not a question of rights perse but rather on how much Govt limitation we're willing to accept. That the Govt has the power to impose all manner of restriction doesn't make it "right", it's just that it's the best way we humans have of trying to decide what to do. In talking about reasonable restrictions I have to bring up the old NMSL of 55 mph. Did you ... or pretty much anyone ... agree with that ? I'll guess 'no' given how ignored that law was. Why was that ? I ask this question because the answer goes to the heart of the whole debate.
What's a reasonable restriction ? What makes it so ?
I maintain that a blanket restriction of 45 mph across all of Winni and at all times is too restrictive and better could be done.