I think about how if personal cars had been a thing when the bill of rights was written, if they would have written an amendment like "the right to travel being a vital part of the state, the right to drive a vehicle shall not be infringed ".
Today we’d have all sorts of problems. People would say driver’s licenses were unconditional. Requiring corrective lenses would be thrown out. Any vehicle inspections for safety or efficiency would be gone. People would be driving tanks around and destroying roads while screaming about their 2nd-prime amendment rights.
So I have two points. One: unbounded rules are a bad idea. Two: just because the constitution says something doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
yeah but those countries have managed to update their laws within the last 233 years
I think about how if personal cars had been a thing when the bill of rights was written, if they would have written an amendment like "the right to travel being a vital part of the state, the right to drive a vehicle shall not be infringed ".
Today we’d have all sorts of problems. People would say driver’s licenses were unconditional. Requiring corrective lenses would be thrown out. Any vehicle inspections for safety or efficiency would be gone. People would be driving tanks around and destroying roads while screaming about their 2nd-prime amendment rights.
So I have two points. One: unbounded rules are a bad idea. Two: just because the constitution says something doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.