[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [AT-L] Why no dogs in GSMNP?
>: Micheal, I am not attacking you personally here. Rather, I am using your
>: post to vent a frustration I have been long feeling with many people I have
>: known (some of them wilderness 'professionals').
>
>: My response to the above is "how do you know who is a drunk driver and who
>: is not?" You certainly don't take everyones car away! When you apply a rule
>: on your behalf you impose a loss of freedom on others. And the world
>: becomes alittle tighter for all of us. We all feel a bit more squeezed in.
>
>This is probably not a good analogy since no one is trying to take your dog
>away. They are only restricting the use of your dog as there are many laws
>that restrict the use of your car. I can drive faster than the posted speed
>limit safely, but there are many who can't, so we have speed limits.
>
>: We live with drunk driving deaths. And we realize that we will have to face
>: the idea of comforting those who realize a loss because of it. But we do
>: live with it. Why? Because we know that to take our cars away implies a
>: loss of freedom. And we value that freedom. And so instead of taking away
>: cars, we find another way... like more severe penalties.
>
Hmmm, Tom, it seems the main premise wasn't understood here.
I guess I shouldn't have implied that you couldn't OWN a car... only that
you couldn't DRIVE it (keep it at home with your dog).
:-)
-KJB