Mandatory In-Car Breathalyzers by 2020?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Drunk driving checkpoints presume you’re drunk until you demonstrate otherwise to the satisfaction of a cop.DADDSS lead

In about five years – maybe sooner – your car may take over that job.

NHTSA – the federal agency that brought you shrapnel-spewing airbags you’re not allowed to say no to – has revealed its next decision-made-for-you in the name of “safety”:

In-car Breathalyzers… for everyone.

Not just people actually convicted of drunk driving, as is sometimes ordered by the court as a precondition for getting behind the wheel again. You know… as a consequence of their actually having done something to justify it.

For everyone – including people who never drink at all.

Well, for every new car.

By around 2020, if they sort the technology out.

Oh, they say it will be voluntary; merely an “available option.” If you buy that, I’d like to talk with you about some Florida real estate I have for sale… . When you hear them warble about “safety,” bet your bippie the next thing you hear will be mandatory. (See: seat belts, air bags, back-up cameras.)

And an ordinary Breathalyzer this isn’t.DADDS 2

You wouldn’t have to blow into a machine. Just breathe. “Passive” air samplers built into the dashboard would do the trick. Or, merely touch the ignition button, steering wheel or gearshift lever. The Driver Alcohol Detection System For Safety – or DADSS (and no, I am not making this up; see here) will “passively sample” your body’s chemical composition using infrared spectroscopy to measure your blood alcohol content by reading the light reflected through blood vessels just below the skin.

If the system detects alcohol, the car won’t start.

All the major automakers are on board. Because there’s money to be made – in addition to control to be had.

One of the creepier aspects of DADDs (other than the bile-bubbling acronym) is that the “drunk” threshold could be adjusted – downward – and not by you. The professional termagants – male and female – at Mothers Against Drunk Driving (who are “partnered” with NHTSA on this project) have long been on record for zero tolerance as the ultimate goal. Any whiff of alcohol whatsoever would trigger the shutdown.

Well, could.

And they are drooling with eagerness to make it so.   


Conceivably, DADDs could narc you out in real time. Send a text to the nearest cop. Along with the make/model of your car, its tags – and where you are at the moment. 

Your insurance company will be CC’d on all of this.

And once new cars are so rigged, what about old cars not so rigged? Will they be characterized as “unsafe”? Retrofitting required?

But isn’t all of this a good thing? Don’t we want “dangerous drunks” to not drive?


But first, let’s define “dangerous drunk.”   

Twenty years ago, it was defined as having a BAC of .10 or higher. If you had a BAC of .08 in those days, you were not a “dangerous drunk” – legally speaking, at least – and free to go.

Today, of course, you are a “dangerous drunk” if you drive with a .08 BAC. And in many states, .06 BAC is sufficient to charge you with the offense. For teens, it is any blood-alcohol concentration whatever.

Are they “dangerous drunks”? Or victims of a latter-day witch hunt?

Also – need it be said? – technology is not infallible. Ask the people mauled by shrapnel-spewing air bags about this. Or the people charged by cops with “drunk” driving who were driving but as it turned out (many lawyer bills later) actually not “drunk.” Cops are not infallible, either.

Expect DADDs to err as well.DADDS4

What if the driver is “designated” and imbibed nothing – but his three passengers are pickled? Will the dashboard sensors be sensitive enough to separate out the driver’s exhalations from those of his soused passengers? Will he have to prove to the cops – and the insurance mafia – that he wasn’t the one who’d been drinking?

How accurate are the skin-sampling spectrographic scanners? Presumably, less than 100 percent. And however many percent turns out to be the margin of error, the consequences of that will be on us – not the regulators (and “moms” over at MADD) who sicced DADDs on us.

Just like killer air bags.

So much for “if it saves even one life,” it’s worth it.

Or, not.   

And what about this business of treating people as presumptively guilty of things – and requiring them to prove otherwise before being allowed to go about their business. Is it not – what did they used to call it? – unAmerican?

And, of course, forcing them to pay for the privilege.pre crime pic

DADDs is not going to be provided gratis, or via grants from Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Like air bags, like back-up cameras, whatever it costs to build DADDs into every new car will be added to the sticker price – plus a certain profit margin. This is why every major automaker is on board.

“Safety” can make you a lot of money.

This seems to be the new American Way.

Find some thing that’s (so they say) bad – something people might do. Then assume everyone does it and pass legislation requiring them to demonstrate that they’re not doing it, or imposing technology to “assist” or “help” them, for “safety.”

And make them pay for it.

It all began with drunk driving checkpoints. Drunk driving sensors in your next new car is the logical next step. Well, one of them.

There are so many things people might do; so many possibilities to preemptively act to keep them “safe.”

What a wonderful world they’re creating.    

If you value independent media, please support independent media. We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! And the Clovers carpet-chewing!

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer to avoid PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: EPautos stickers are free to those who sign up for a $5 or more monthly recurring donation to support EPautos, or for a one-time donation of $10 or more. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)EPautoslogo



  1. The air sampler would be easy to defeat. Just put some duct tape, masking tape, or other air-blocker on it. As for the ignition sensor, either wear gloves or have a sober passenger push the button.

    Eric is right about the lack of reliability. Even a 99.9% accuracy rate would mean thousands of false positives AND false negatives. No way the DADDS manufacturers would be held liable for those errors, of course.

  2. For several years I belonged to the Texaco Motor Club (been awhile, I know). My wife was not satisfied w/the coverage/benefits and talked me into switching to AAA.
    One of the ‘extra benefits’ of AAA is their magazine, which the wife just tends to pitch w/o even opening, but if I see it I take it into the ‘library’ to at least skim through before recycling (in the burn barrel).
    So, this am I’m on the throne flipping pages. Lo and behold they are endorsing a new report that recommends lowering the (already ridiculously low) BAC to 0.05%. Note, this does not affect me personally, as I seldom drink and never much. It’s the nannyness of it.
    Time for another change. Any recommendations, anyone?

    • Here in Oz we’re all now 0.05%, a couple of states held out at 0.08% for a while. Thing is, they say that’s the “legal limit”, however the bite is in what they won’t tell you – that if you’re AT the limit of 0.05%, you STILL receive a court appearance – in this country at least!

      Since when was anyone dragged into court for travelling at the speed limit, for example? How would anyone even let themselves be dragged through court if they actually comprehended the term “legal limit”?

      I’ve never had the luxury of DUI or even bothering to stop for a breatho lately so I can’t factually test my above argument, but I’d say it would be case closed.

    • PtB, last week I had to drive 60 miles to a driver license center for the inevitable since I had tried locally the day before and was unsuccessful, just like the last time. So instead of waiting all afternoon again and very possibly not getting a new DL(it was my BD, no time to delay)we drove to this other town/city.

      After that harassing adventure we went to a local restaurant with not only good food but a great bar. Since the place was packed, we went to the bar as we normally do anyway, much nicer, quieter people there, same food. The wife had a big ass margarita and I had a couple tall boy size mugs of beer and we ate. Had I been stopped, I couldn’t have shown anything other than drunk so it’s a moot point if you’ve recently consumed. Even one beer will show you drunk at .08 if it’s just been drunk.

      Well, in for a penny, in for a pound, so we stopped and got a 12 of Shiner at the beginning of the back roads. Of course back roads are no guarantee these days.

      Nothing like re-upping your Class A CDL with various endorsements and getting a DUI on your BD but we were lucky….again. Now you simply just don’t have a CDL for 30 days if you get on a “alcohol rehabilitation program” that same day(not likely while you’re in jail).

      BTW, I recently had the old drug tests plus alcohol. When I went to the back room for the “blow test”(I figured they used pee….nope), I realized I had a Hall’s Mentholyptus in my mouth. I’ve had a chance to play with a breathalyzer and virtually anything will set one off. DPS commonly sit and joke about nailing somebody with bad onion breath or something similar.

      I balked and said I was afraid the cough drop would screw me. The bitch, and she certainly was one, assured me that wouldn’t happen but it didn’t sway me and then the woman up front, close to my age said “Oh, it was one of those that made me fail the test”. No way in hell I was going to do it then. So the “bitch” once again said she’d give me 10 minutes(it was supposed to be 15….by law) to clear out. I told her it was a shame I couldn’t eat or drink anything to clear my mouth. After passing it with 0.00%, I took my paperwork and left. A month later I get a call and another group who does our DOT stuff said I had to take another BAC test.

      WTF, said I, I passed the one fine. Oh, she wrote a bunch of stuff saying I wanted to go eat and get something to drink and a lot of other crap I never said the other people told me. So, for the second time and cost to the company, I had to get another test, another 0.00% so the state would accept it with no bs written on it.

      • “she wrote a bunch of stuff saying I wanted to go eat and get something to drink and a lot of other crap I never said”

        Think positively, maybe she’ll get a DWI tonight as she’s heading home from WalMart. Maybe she’ll smart off to the DPS and get her ass whipped, too. ahaha

        • Ed, it made no sense unless she’s a cop sucker deluxe which I expect could be the reason. I never looked to see what she wrote since I passed showing 0 alcohol. Now if I’d surreptitiously appeared to eat or drink something I could understand but mainly what I did was I pissed on her bread and butter and her colleague said I had a very good point. There is no accounting for people like that except being a copsucker, a clover type with a bit of power and an even greater need to use it.

          I think she’s the doctor’s wife who owns this “clinic”. I can tell you from experience with an alcoholic doctor friend they can get away with anything and not be jailed. They’re part of “the club”.

  3. So now El Rushbo is predicting that, because the Left had such an easy time getting the Reprobates (sic for Republicans) to roll over on removal of the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, that they will soon be going after the US flag. Which is fine by me. But he says the reason they want to do that is some research from 5 years ago that says people who see the US flag are more likely to vote “R” for the next 8 months. OK, nothing wrong w/that either. But my question is, what can we also remove that would make people more likely to vote “D”? How can we encourage them to stay home?

    • Hi Phillip,

      Rush is a master of misdirection. It’s far more likely that statues of Jefferson will be taken down than the American flag (which stands for the centralized state Rush loves as much as any “liberal”).

      • I realize Rush is full of hot air. In fact, if global warming was real, I’d suspect him of being the cause. But he’s still fun to listen to, once in a while in small doses. Just take it all with a box of salt.

        • I don’t know how he does it – or why.

          I mean, he’s rich and he’s old. How much more money does he need? Dude doesn’t have kids. Yet he continues to whore for the GOP.

          I can’t recall a single instance of him ever deviating from the party line.

          He’d have been right at home at the Volkischer Beobachter or Pravda.

          • Yeah, it’s funny, but most of what he says about the demoncrats is true, but he either doesn’t realize or doesn’t care that it is just as true of the Elephants.

          • If it’s not about the money, it must be about the power. They do say it’s the ultimate aphrodisiac.
            Did he get hooked on oxy because he had back problems?

              • He did – and his utter lack of empathy (and cynicism) is just one of many reasons why I loathe him.

                This guy tub-thumps for the “war” on (some) “drugs.” Amens – cheers – throwing people in cages for “doing” arbitrarily illegal “drugs.”

                But whines like a bitch – expecting sympathy – when he is discovered to be a “user” himself.

                It’s of a piece with his war-mongering… he himself never actually mongering war. Just demanding that others be sent to fight and die – and kill – on his behalf.


                • It’s kind of like back in the day when Jim Bakker got caught with his cookie in the nookie, and Jimmy Swaggart was all over him. Then he was discovered to be in a similar situation. “Methinks [he] doth protest too much.”
                  Of course I think Rush probably cut a deal to continue to monger the War on (Some) Drugs in order not to do time himself.

                  • Prolly.

                    But what makes him an asshole (in my estimation) is he long-ago acquired his “fuck you” money and no longer needs to whore himself out. Yet he does, to the nth degree.

                    There is no way (cue Jackie Gleason voice) he could possibly believe the bullshit he touts.

                    • Limbaugh of 25 years ago or so was very different. He sold out for the big money and then either became beholden to those people or simply enjoys conning masses of people or both. Assuming he enjoys radio too much to quit of course.

                      If I had the kind of money he has I would build my fortress of solitude out in the woods and build and fix stuff all day.

            • Dear Phil,

              Limbaugh’s psychology is not all that different from Ellsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead.



              Toohey is a power-seeker. In various ways, he attempts to gain control over the lives of other men. At the personal level, he acquires a legion of followers who blindly obey his every command. Toohey deceives his victims by posturing as a humanitarian, but the code he preaches — that of self-sacrifice — is utterly destructive.

              Toohey has a clear vision of his role in the collectivist state. He himself is not the brute of physical force who gains dominance by unleashing a reign of terror. His role, rather, is to be the intellectual advisor behind the throne. The brute will hold physical power over the masses, and Toohey will hold spiritual power over the brute. Toohey is a behind-the-scenes puppet master, who surreptitiously wields the real power — and this will be his place in the totalitarian state he seeks.

              Whether Limbaugh or his liberal counterparts even measure up to Toohey is debatable.

              But their mindsets are the same.

                    • I’m using Rand’s hierarchy in this particular case.

                      Her idea was that the most influential people were the most “powerful” people.

                      They weren’t necessarily the most powerful in terms of wealth and authority. That “honor” goes to the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, the Bushes and the Cheneys.

                      But the ideologues who establish the Conventional Wisdom that the mainstream sheeple defer to are the most powerful in Rand’s book.

                      Limbaugh is relatively low on the totem pole, but that is his role in the ecosystem.

    • “How can we encourage them to stay home?”

      I give up…maybe beat the piss out of every one of them we see every day for a month? That would be a big job, but just think how good you’ll sleep when you’re done. 😉

  4. Along these lines, consider this:

    Humanity is Developing Survival Resistance to Government Lies
    By Bernie Suarez


    Whether you understand it or not, those that wish to control you are a parasite on the species. Their infective process is carried out by thought signals within other concurring members of the species. These thought signals of control, rules, laws, policing, and legal system of enslavement perpetuate itself within the species, and is the very system that we know as the controlling governmental system. It seeks to simply control and enslave others. There is really no other purpose for its existence. It generates the mental signals needed to perpetuate the control system of enslavement to take away your individual freedom and your wealth and money. It does all of this by the system of rules we logically understand today as government.

    • Bevin, I had just got through reading that when I came back to this site. I sure hope he’s right. You’d think the young would look around and see how much better off my crowd is and realize why. Of course they see plenty of my age group who are struggling too. When you don’t have addiction problems such as drugs or gambling and the like and don’t try to live the high life, something is very wrong when you can’t make a decent living. I consider a dozen people living in the same house as un-american simply because it wasn’t that way for many decades.

      We’re closing in on the wages of cultures and people who have known nothing else. When 1% of the population own more than 90% of the wealth it’s a sure sign tyranny has taken hold.

      • Dear 8sm,

        “When you don’t have addiction problems such as drugs or gambling and the like and don’t try to live the high life, something is very wrong when you can’t make a decent living.”

        Damn straight. Now that might sound to some like a left wing redistributionist talking, but we know otherwise.

        The fact is we oppose redistributionism, including the current redistributionism, which is from the middle class to the uber-rich banksters, who in effect counterfeit 900 dollars on every 1000 dollars deposited in their banks.

            • bevin, I won’t try to tell you I was a “libertarian” as I know it now but for nearly my whole life, I believed in the NAP and no rulers, no cops and much of that probably had to do with their not being a need for cops in the part of Tx I grew up in.

              To think that an assistant coach changed my life when I was 14 by pointing out I’d be cannon fodder in Vietnam before I knew what was happening and I actually was intrigued enough to take him seriously even though I detested the guy.

              By the time uncle sam was champing at the bits to get me into uniform, I had already identified the problem and saw it was unbridled greed.

              Since that time I’ve always been branded as a “radical”. Well, I guess my whole class of 20 males who graduated together must have believed some of it too since no one in my graduating class in high school served in the armed forces.

              Of course we knew plenty of guys coming back really screwed up or room temperature or simply never heard from again(MIA). Uncle just loves ignorant country folk as well as ignorant folk from anywhere.

              One thing that influenced me a great deal when I was very young was a sign in the barbershop(and their great selection of SOF mags)that said(and we heard this at school all the time since we were in a “zone” of retaliation) “In case of nuclear attack, sit down, bend over and put your head between your legs(this was on the walls in school too….but not the last part)and kiss your ass goodbye”. I thought about that a lot and the Cuba crisis was very real to me. I had lots of time to think about these things having mainly a radio and time on my hands. I heard a good one from the John Boy and Billy show this morning when the Curmudgeonly Old Man did his monologue and spoke of TV’s when broadcasting was virtually non-existent. It was fairly hilarious and I could identify with it. Huge sets with tiny little round screens and rarely a program to watch. I once thought that I wouldn’t want to be anywhere that tv was broadcast cause any show you might get well enough to see was in a blizzard. Even when people seemed to be inside it was snowing so hard you could barely see them.

              • Dear 8sm,

                I wouldn’t dare claim that I was nearly as principled a libertarian when I was younger.

                For a time I believed intensely in urban planning for the sake of visual order. I ignored the inconsistency with my declared classical liberal premise.

                Live and learn. Live and learn.

                • bevin, it’s a learning process for everybody. I didn’t even know I was a libertarian. I was known as being radical and stubborn. I still am…..known for it…..and radical and stubborn. I wasn’t so different from a lot of older Texans although my age group had that good old propaganda education.
                  Teachers finally learned it was easier to ignore me when I refused to pray or say the pledge or other things that were expected of obedient slaves.

                  I recall in the second grade my teacher I despised gave me an “S” in “citizenship”. My mother asked me why. I deigned to reply. I wasn’t ready to tell her “Cause I can’t stand my stupid ass classmates”. Of course there were a couple of them I liked ok but I could have spent every recess by myself…..and did till some teachers banded together(it’s tough taking on a 7 year old when you’re merely one woman)and made me play with everyone else. I’d pick things that didn’t have many participants. I liked foot races since I could do my own thing and not have to interact with them.

                  Later my dry wit got me in big trouble but nobody knew how to make me stop so they finally quit trying. That was fine with me. Every time a teacher would try to coax an answer they wanted I went out of my way to rub their noses in the truth of the situation. I wasn’t popular with the lockstep crowd. I’m still not.

                  Last year a guy 20 years younger than me I worked around/with when I could asked me(he was really mad cause I hadn’t stopped my truck in the exact spot he wanted….but that had changed from every other load where that exact spot had been where he wanted it)if I knew why everybody(according to him)hated my ass. No,Todd, tell me, I so value your opinion. He said “It’s because you just do your own thing”. What that boiled down to was I had a job that was easily traceable as far as what I was getting done. I had to get my rig ready everyday well ahead of when I could load and while everyone else slept an hour past when they were supposed to be working, I didn’t have that luxury. I got tired of trying to wake a big crew of dead-asses up so I’d just take the crew truck to the site 30 miles away and leave them to drive private vehicles when they finally got roused, whenever that would be.

                  They thought they could fudge it but nobody was fooled and I couldn’t fudge anything since I had time stamps on my load tickets and you only needed to see when I delivered a load to figure out when I’d loaded it. Not a one of them could have cut trucking.

                  To be honest, I enjoy the time before dawn when no one else is around and I’m in the middle of nowhere with nothing but mother nature to commune with.

                  And yes, I did my own thing because that was what I was hired to do. I’m funny that way.

                  • Dear 8sm,

                    Have you watched the “Divergent” film series?

                    The latest installment, the second one in a quadrilogy, has just come out on DVD.

                    The Divergent Series: Insurgent

                    The series depicts a dystopian collectivist future in which people are pigeonholed as one of five standard categories and assigned compulsory roles in society.

                    Those who don’t fit, who refuse to obediently play their assigned roles in society are called “Divergents”.

                    The film series is a political allegory for the increasingly totalitarian society in which we live, and in which “Divergents” such as libertarian non-conformists have no choice but to rebel.

                    Amazingly prophetic. Well worth seeing.

                    • bevin, thanks for the heads up. I don’t have tv or high speed internet(I need a tower and I’m working on it for high speed internet). I’ll try to find the DVD though. it sounds like something that would get my blood pressure up. I just volunteered to take my TENS unit to a co-worker because he hurt his back. He has one so it wasn’t needed. I’ll do pretty much anything for anyone who needs help but I simply can’t tolerate orders…..of any sort.

                      Recently I got into a big shitty with my boss. he said he had a load that HAD to be delivered but the truck was very unsafe and I refused to drive it. Not just for my own safety but others as well. I could never live with myself if I hurt or killed some innocent person because a load HAD to be delivered. I’m a stubborn SOB and I admit it but it’s not for superfluous reasons.

                      This sounds like a great series. I hope I can find it on disc.

                    • Bevin,

                      The book trilogy was very good, although I think the 3rd book was the weakest of the three.

                      I did not see the movie, but I do plan on seeing it.

                    • Dear Mith,

                      I bought the books but have been waiting for the film versions first before reading them.

                      I might give in though.

                      I already finished reading the Hunger Games series. The concluding volume is very good.

                      It does not just have the “good guys” win. It underscores the fact that anyone who becomes “The Government” is not a “good guy”, but merely a “new guy”.

                      The heroine remains a skeptic of government per se.

                      Very good message.

                    • bevin, the first time I heard of SHTF I immediately told my wife that if any part of the system collapses be it physical or simply a failure of the monetary system, the SHTF when the food stops being delivered……along with everything else. I have doubts about lasting very long without electricity much less food. Can I grow and harvest enough protein to survive? Can I cut enough wood with an axe in the winter to stay warm? I know my wife’s and my meds would stop but we’d probably lose weight to the point that hypertension wouldn’t be that big a deal for me but her’s is congenital.

                      Can we fend off those who would attempt to take what we have? That part alone makes it much worse than simply not having power, food or meds. I can store a large amount of penicillin based meds but don’t have a source for other antibiotics and I’m highly allergic to penicillin.

                      It doesn’t take long to understand what my cousin said when presented with the situation. “I have everything I need. A big bottle of Scotch and one round of .357”. A great many people will quickly come to that conclusion even without the scotch or something much less quick than a .357.

                    • Dear 8sm,

                      “I have everything I need. A big bottle of Scotch and one round of .357″. A great many people will quickly come to that conclusion… ”

                      True dat!

                      Quite a few dystopian stories, both film and tv, depict that as part of the the consequences of the zombie apocalypse.

                      The Walking Dead series showed it many times. The protagonists would rummage for supplies in abandoned homes. Inside, the corpses of the families that committed suicide would be rotting away.

                      Grim scene, all the grimmer for being increasingly likely every year that goes by.

                    • bein, I can’t stream a vid but will look for the DVD.
                      What Tess relates is dead on with “dead on” being the key words.

                      I’m curious as to what percentage of people who read it have the means to do anything about it.

                      My best bet for any future of any sort would be to steal a Wally truck, a fuel truck and a major grocery truck. I’d then need to share it with those who helped and hope none went off the reservation after too much stress. Stealing the trucks are easy, hiding them less so. Disconnecting the batteries and killing the GPS is a must and being able to disable the GPS before going far from the point of theft would be the best scenario. Many are located outside the tractor but some are internal although I believe they all have an external antenna. Knocking that off would be a good first step.
                      Now is a good time to build a very large barn…..right beside your house.

  5. There is much partially-justified pessimism present in these comments; but I wish to point out reasons for hope. I became an anarchist well over a decade ago, and I was very far from being the first person from being the origin of those ideals. Back then: Everybody I tried to talk to about rational philosophy thought that I was a real anti-american pro-terrorist extremist.
    Today, I can easily find people who are open-minded enough to consider the logical points that bI have made, and a good number of them are already well on their way of becoming anti-statists. I am an Army veteran, and all of my peers back then would have considered me as becoming a traitor! Todays veterans are oftentimes already moving toward my viewpoint.
    More and more “mericans” are opening their eyes and seeing truth for the first time.
    Articles and comments such as these must continue; but I now feel that there is hope for the eventual freedom of humanity! The ruling elite are losing their centuries old powers, and we human beings with above average intelligence will continue working to bypass their stupid so-called laws. The less intelligent will eventually be won over to our side due to the fact that genuine free markets work.
    To be sure; things really look bad now!!!! I ask you folks to consider the likely hood of this present tyranny lasting given the fact that we ‘mericans are being taxed at more than 100% if deficit spending and unfunded liabilities are included.
    Reason is slowly winning! Clovers be damned!

    • Brian, I read an article by Gary North this week with the position of wondering if the Donald sought and got the presidency if he might not be the tipping point. He seems to be anti-govt.,(although he’s used govt. to the max to make money), has no love for the DC crowd and so on. Well, we certainly need a watershed moment. If the Donald is serious, I’d like to hear his position.

      Every time someone comes on this site or I meet someone who’s seen the light, I get a glimmer of hope……not much for my life but maybe for those have-not young-uns coming up who don’t believe the status quo.

      • Trump has made comments that what the government does is very good for him and those like him but not anyone else. He sees the problem, he profits from the problem. It’s the later part that is bothersome. If he doesn’t have the morals to not take advantage of what he knows is unfair even though he has more than enough money already (according to the amounts he has claimed) why should I think he will put an end to it?

        • Brent, that’s the $64 question. So few of the uber rich ever think in terms of what is enough but then again. there are people who have given huge amounts of money…..and not like the Gate’s who give it to control the world. I know, I know, the Carnegie, the Ford Foundation, and on and on they seem to have their own agenda and it’s moreover to keep their agenda on top. Just look at the contributors over the decades that contributed to the Rand Corporation. But they do make good tools ha ha.

      • I’m among those who hold the view that it’s kind of a contradiction in terms to expect the leader of a centralized authoritarian state to deconstruct it. The people voting in elections want authoritarian collectivism. They merely differ as to the form it takes.

        Imagining that Ron Paul or Trump or anyone is going to “fix” Washington and turn the clock back even 15 minutes is kind of like putting a doily on a snapping turtle and expecting it to behave like a nice old orange Tomcat.

        The true fix will happen – if it ever does – when enough people stop voting. When they consciously, openly reject the idea that they have any right to exercise control over any other person, whether directly or by proxy. That the only right they possess is to be left in peace – and the only obligation they have is to leave others in peace.

        Then, as the Marxists put, the state (organized coercion) will “whither away” and people will figure it out on their own, on a voluntary, mutually agreeable basis.

        • Dear Eric,

          “The true fix will happen – if it ever does – when enough people stop voting. When they consciously, openly reject the idea that they have any right to exercise control over any other person, whether directly or by proxy. ”

          Today this notion sounds “utopian” to many.

          But the abolition of slavery (in its more obvious form) once must have sounded equally “utopian”.

          That’s the thing about paradigm shifts in mass consciousness. They seem utterly impossible beforehand, and utterly matter of fact afterwards.

          • bevin, reading back over this brought an article to mind I just read. It fairly much represents my views.

            Ideally, I’m an anarchyst. But ideals don’t make it so and I’m also a realist, pragmatic since it’s been forced on me by govt.

            In that context, let’s look at this article that makes some great points as to ideal libertarianism and doing what you can with the situation you have.


            I’ll be damned, it doesn’t think I’m spam for the first time in a long time. It may simply be the “tiny” url but whatever, it seems to be working.

            • Not bad, 8, not bad at all.
              BTW, in the DoI, TJ wrote about ‘the consent of the governed.’ But the Federal (and now National) gunvermin was formed by the consent of the States. By whose consent were those formed?

              • PtB, back then “consent of the governed” referred to the state as far as I know. It was state legislators who gave the fed its legitimacy or removed it, hence the right to withdraw from the union with other states.

                The great liar represented those elites of Europe who wanted to control that union by hook or crook or mass killing. Business as usual was the motto after that war of aggression.

              • PtB, also the only power the “united” states government had was for foreign protection. I guess that changed a bit eh?

    • Dear Brian,

      The me of today would not recognize the me of 10, 15 years ago.

      Back then I was already a libertarian, pretty hard core I thought, but still a minarchist.

      People are waking up. We can’t give up hope.

        • Dear Brian,

          Back then I would not have used a Guy Fawkes mask as my icon.

          I’m guessing you would not have used an anarcho-capitalist “A” symbol either.


          • You are of course correct bevin. My previous explanation was extremely abbreviated due to time constraints.
            Back then; I might have used a picture of Thomas Jefferson or of the cover of a book that contained the content of the CONstitution or of the Federalist Papers. I was not then even aware of the existence of the anti-federalist papers or of the works of Lysander Spooner.
            My transition actually began in the early ’90’s during the check writing scandal and when they voted themselves a pay raise effective immediately. I knew from my civics courses in school that the later was unconstitutional, and I expected to see a backlash over it. I was absolutely shocked that nothing happened! I then wondered what had happened to our so-called constitution.
            I also became a member of the so-called Christian coalition during that era, and I became mortified when that group endorsed pro-abortion Bob Dole for president during the primary election. I also caught republican congresscritters voting for unconstitutional bills. I then promptly left the Christian Coalition and the republican party.
            I then joined first the taxpayers party (now called the constitution party), then the America First party, then the Libertarian party.
            It was years later before I could begin to conduct research into how the U.S. government got away from being constitutional one via my first computer in December of 1998 and the Internet. During this time, I also was facing a financial catastrophe, and I was entertaining the idea of escaping from society due to my ignorance of bankruptcy laws. I was literally searching on-line how to vanish from society into an American wilderness when I discovered modern homesteading, and a few days later: the patriot movement. I never joined the patriot movement because the groups held inconsistent viewpoints, but one of the members repeatedly posted links to various Lew Rockwell articles.
            The articles were compelling enough to cause me to subscribe. Over time I learned that everything the government pretended to provide could have actually been provided by the free market for lower cost and a higher value.
            During that era I also discovered the now defunct alternative book company called Loompanics which lead me to nonmainstream books and book writers including Claire Wolf and the before mentioned Boston T Party.
            My previously posted summary covered the rest of that era.
            I sure would love to hear your transformation story Bevin if you would like to share it,

            • Dear Brian,

              My story is similar, albeit not so dramatic.

              I was mostly a libertarian beginning in college. When I learned about John Locke and Adam Smith in my World history classes, I knew immediately where I stood.

              I confess to a serious inconsistency however when it came to urban design. I assumed that without strong urban design regulations, architectural chaos would prevail, and favored strict visual design regulations that ensured uniformity, such as prevailed in Europe and Ancient China.

              In time I came to see the error of my ways from a rights perspective when I read Ayn Rand after graduating college.

              For a time I became a “Randroid”. Fortunately, I became involved in psychology and began to realize that was a psychological dead end.

              I still wasn’t an anarchist however. I still bought into Rand’s faulty argument against anarchism. I assumed that “law enforcement” was the one exception to the rule against monopoly.

              Only later did I realize Rand had falsely equate monopoly with objectivity.

              My first really big clue was when Newt Gingrich took over congress in 1994 with the “Republican Revolution”. I thought, “Now everything is going to change”. We are going to “take back America”.

              Lo and behold, NOTHING HAPPENED!!!

              That’s when I started to realize that an “R” after a pols name was no different than a “D”.

              I still believed in Ron Paul though. Actually I still believe in Ron Paul even today. But that’s because I believe he is an anarchist pretending to be a minarchist in order to win converts from within the system.

              Eventually I was won over when I learned about Medieval Iceland and the successful historical implementation of anarchism in the real world, from Mise Org.

              • Hello again Bevin,
                Your reply reminded me of other things that anger me about government schools. About a decade ago I took a series of tests to determine my IQ and the ideal profession I should seek. The results really surprised me because they stated that my IQ and my personality traits point toward an ideal career in either interior design or architecture.
                I wondered why in the hell the school guidance counsellor never tell me that my IQ was above average, or what jobs would fit me? I was looking at my report card scores and seeing A’s through C’s on various subjects, which I interpreted to mean I had above average to average intelligence and was not college material. Had he or the Army recruiter told me that I scored in the top 1% of society in spatial intelligence, and that having the mental ability to visualize in 3D color a project in my head, place it on paper, then create a step by step process to build it was a rare gift; then I would have pursued a different career path other than being a mechanic and later, a truck driver. I thought back then that every boy with an average intelligence could do those things.
                I did not pursue those options once I learned about them a decade ago due to tuition costs, remaining time left before reaching retirement age, the requirement of yet another government license, and my preference to live in semi-rural areas.

                  • John Taylor Gatto makes the point very well that government schools exist in order to indoctrinate and to instill obedience. Indeed, the writings of the early schooling reformers, such as John Dewey, make no bones about it. They freely state that those are their aims. That is why I refuse to refer to the “education” system. Today’s schools have nothing to do with education.

                    To anyone whose inquiring mind might wonder: yes, I used to be Mike in Spotsy. We moved from Spotsylvania County to Stafford County this weekend. Hence the new and improved screen name.

                    • Aargh. My name change means that my comments have to wait in moderation. Oh, what a world.

                      Can that be changed if I promise to make only moderate comments?

                    • Mike, since I know nothing about either county I’ll take your word it’s a move in the right direction.

                      Next time you move come to Tx. We need more of your kind with fresh attacks on the Confederacy as well as the 1st and 2nd amendments.

                      Besides, we’d get a big grin ever time you spoke. Definitely not a Tx. drawl I suspect.

                      I was thinking yesterday about the way different people spoke and about the Army brats I knew who had no real accent. I think they got short-changed. Everybody needs an accent of some sort.

                      Good luck on your new residence.

                    • Eric: Thank you.

                      Bevin: I’m still around but don’t have much time to spend here. I try to read some of the comments every day, but rarely post anything because I know there won’t be any time to follow up on any responses.

                      8sm: The move was pretty much a wash as far as people’s attitudes. Virginia has become a political hellhole because of all the government employees in the northern part of the state.

                    • Dear Mike,

                      EPAutos, like chocolate, is almost too much of a good thing.

                      Gotta ration. Otherwise one could wind up here 24/7.

                  • bevin, great blog here. You hooked me. I just had a rant against cops last night to a statist friend who calls himself libertarian. Too bad he’s still got the David mindset on religion and the coptard love for the pheroes who defy death every day.

                    He fully expects me to be totally against cops and he gets what he expects.

                    I’m going to send him this link so he can learn himself up a bit ha ha.

                    • Hi Bevin,
                      I like the blog too.
                      I would like to suggest 1 slight adjustment.
                      The consent of the governed: the surrender of the victim.

                    • Dear 8sm, Phil,


                      Coming from you guys, that’s a true compliment!

                      We know we’re winning when non-libertarians starting boasting that they’re libertarians! It means we’ve convinced the sheeple that libertarianism is the moral high ground, which of course, it is!

                      Will make that change Phil. Good one. Thanks!

                • This sounds a great deal like myself. I put in 3.5 years on an ME degree that would have taken at least another year for me. This was during Vietnam and I was not only discriminated against but got sick of starving. I married my GF and began farming for hire. Not long after that I started trucking since my uncles were in the biz and I liked it. I’ve done just about everything since then and find myself trucking again and happy to be there.

                  I used to dream of trucking after getting out of it. I could remember routes and everything about them including when I shifted various trucks, the exact point to some degree. When you’re wired into something like that to that degree it’s easy to go back to it.

                  Last week I spoke to a guy a few years older than me who retired from trucking. He admitted he still wanted to keep trucking and his wife can’t understand it. He’s a biker too and said he didn’t really understand it but he missed it daily.

                  I didn’t have to say I understood since we were standing by my rig while I got a flat fixed.

                  I really dug ME in college but couldn’t stand the nerds I had to deal with, could never figure out the proper amount of pens and pencils in my pocket protector ha ha and my slide rule bugged hell out of me hanging off my belt…..for real. I just felt like a duck out of water.

                  Now I think I’ll go to bed and run through that 18 speed a few times…..or countless times till manana. Maybe I’ll get to feel a DD 16 with 2250 lb ft of torque, something I’ve never experienced.

  6. I think the biggest problem with the driving laws is their binary nature. Most laws are open to very large “grey areas,” hence the need for lawyers to argue one way or the other. But when it comes to operating a motor vehicle, it’s all or nothing. You were either driving too fast or you weren’t, no accounting for anything other than a sign on the side of the road. Was it your intent to drive too fast? Doesn’t matter. Does it matter that your vehicle was designed to run the Autobahns at 150 MPH all day long? Nope. Perhaps there was a reason, such as your child was bleeding profusely and you needed to get him to the hospital. Should have called an ambulance. The same sort of binary rules have been applied to alcohol and driving.

    This is the failure of the legal system. Note that driving and alcohol consumption are considered to be outside of the minimum requirement for living. Driving is a privilege, a reward for being a good slave. Alcohol consumption is a vice, with the religious overtones and condescending attitudes from the holier-than-thou crowd. The state allows you to enjoy these fruits of your labor, as long as you don’t enjoy them too much. How much is going to be determined by the state, because if it were up to the individual, a few inexperienced or foolhardy types will overindulge and cause harm. A few bad apples ruin it for all of us. Of course, there exists a few outliers on the positive side as well. Should we not allow for such a possibility as someone who is able to command a vehicle having consumed more alcohol than the “average” person’s ability? The answer is that the state is ultimately a lazy enforcer. Rather than actually have to determine if someone has the basic motor skills to operate a vehicle (no matter the reason), it is much easier to set up a binary rule, that if broken, will positively reenforce the concept of the state as a protector and fair arbiter of justice.

    • Eric_G, let us never forget that those binary laws you so accurately describe are enacted for much more a merely lazy enforcement system. They are a phenomenal source of non-tax revenue for the gun-vermin (and its camp followers in the legal profession). If you are caught breaking one of their laws you will potentially either pay the state or pay a lot more to a lawyer and in many cases end up paying them both. This is (one of many reasons) why they train the cops to lie and falsify evidence. This is why prosecutors are trained to pick juries they are relatively sure will convict. This is why judges often ignore the testimony of multiple witnesses and defer to the statement of a lying cop. If you’re unfortunate enough to be accused of a federal offense, you may not only get to pay, but you may end up essentially a slave to Unicor (a.k.a. Federal Prison Industries if you prefer) for many years. As is everything with the state, binary laws are all about money and power, and lots of it.

    • Eric_G, Too much fun? That’s news to me. Too much fun? There must be
      A whole lotta things that I ain’t done
      I ain’t never had too much fun.

    • “Driving is a privilege, a reward for being a good slave.”

      Actually. . .

      Driving is a right.

      “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”- Thompson v Smith 154 SE 579.

      “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment.” – Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.

      Only if driving is part of your job, are any restrictions allowed.

      “…For while a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion…” – State v Johnson, 243 P. 1073, 1078.

      Back in ’97, I was pulled over for “license plate light not working,” and ended up arrested for drunk driving. I have a crooked foot and a lazy eye, making passing a field sobriety test impossible under any circumstances.
      The cop call for a tow truck to get my car. . . I tell him, “That’s ok, I got it.” He says he has to do that. . . “Ok, fine – YOU are responsible for all fees incurred – towing, storage, etc – as I can have it taken care of myself.”
      We get to the cop shop – breathalyzer. . . Not Drunk.

      It took me a week – after nearly ending up in a firefight with the tow yard operator – talked to the police Chief. . . and got my vehicle returned, no charge.

      Because. . . I wasn’t drunk.

      • Good one there Draco. At least you got out of that.

        One thing: “driving” is essentially a commercial term because “driver” in all legal dictionaries is “one employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon etc.”. When not being paid to be behind the wheel these are the terms you should use (commercial terms on left):

        Driver = Traveller
        Vehicle = Automobile/Private Conveyance
        Passenger = Guest
        Traffic = Travellers
        Person = Man/Woman/Human/Private Person
        Understand = Comprehend
        Includes = Means

        Statute is basically commerce law and the language of Statute is to trick everyone into using commercial terms for everyday language, allowing Statute control over them.

        For example, most people use the word “understand” to convey comprehension and, I wish everyone would stop using that word with blind abandon, because when a cop or judge asks if you understand, he’s asking in a legal sense for your consent and permission to be fucked over by his Statute legislation. Your answer should be: “I comprehend perfectly what you’re asking and why, therefore I do not understand and certainly do not stand under anyone”.

  7. As Eric points out, what happens when this technology screws up and your car refuses to start even if you are a complete teetotaler? Do you want your kid stuck in the freezing cold in an empty parking lot because the computer says no go; I once had a rental in the early days of seatbelts that wouldn’t start if the seat belt wasn’t fastened, except it was effed up, and the only way to start the car was with the seat belt fastened and you turning the key from outside the car – no weight on the seat. What a gem! Maybe they should give these things a trial run with the secret service guys that are always crashing into the White House gates, see how that works out.

  8. You still think we can reach the hearts and minds of boobus americuntus?

    I don’t think it’s possible.
    I’ve spoken with software developers, their attitude is, “I have some moral misgivings about it, but someone’s going to do it, I might as well get paid…”
    I mention software because they USED to be more idealistic… ST:TOS, ST:TNG, Star Wars, etc.
    Now, they’re all sellouts. No more hackers… Lots of phreakers and crackers (Hackers try to get in, make computers do things; phreakers and crackers try to get in to break things and steal data for sale.)
    We need some herbicide to deal with the Clovers.

    • You still think we can reach the hearts and minds of boobus americuntus?

      I tried to post a simple “no’ but wordpress won’t accept that. Evidently word(sic) of my being verbose is not completely true. Fuck you word press.

      When they can’t get their big gulp they’ll begin to catch on. I work with people every day who have to have their “fix”. They simply can’t do without it.

      Let the economy collapse and the only people with food will be the ones who grow their own. Watch them panic and start to question the entire kamutca. They might catch on…..but don’t count on it.

      • That is correct 8, and another thing that readers here should consider is that the state usually turns against its own before it collapses. Once it does that, surviving statists and clovers will finally see the light, or at leased be reduced to a small minority of the population.

      • Tor, it ain’t you I want to hit with something solid. And that thing you posted will be a rancid corpse deprived of her/his fix. That’s when TSHTF in my view. With what China is doing establishing a currency that won’t be part of the US “do it like we say or else” type, it could happen sooner than later. Look for “new” Chinese threats in he MSM. Those pieces of shit in Congress are already wanting to have war with Russia. As much as I detest BO, at least he’s tried to avoid war…..up to now. Fuck em and feed em fish heads.

        I’m going to lube my rock crusher(not the transmission) and start loading those “special” loads.

      • Tor – I could have gone the rest of my life just fine without ever seeing that! Of course I’d probably see something similar riding the “mart cart” the next time I shop for groceries anyway, so no real harm done. But why I haven’t learned not to look yet is beyond me…morbid curiousity I guess. But on the brighter side, when the bix nood segment of the FSA can’t use EBT anymore, at least she’ll render out well enough to feed several of them for a few days. That’ll give Eight a little more time to press out those “special” loads before the FSA marches out to the country and becomes rifle bait. Of course this is ‘Murica and we is spatial, so it cain’t happen heah!

        • The FSA Bix Nood Hamplanets think in extremely tiny time intervals.

          The PTB really aren’t all that much better. Plus they’re miserably dull and unimaginative.

          The first step, I think, is to consider The Long View. The Long Past. The Long Now. The Long Future.

          When you think of the Human Clock. Think of The Long Now. The current year is 202015. Anatomically modern humans emerged in Africa in the Middle Paleolithic, 202015 years ago. In the Human Year 0. Our ancestors emerged 202 millenia, and 15 years ago.

          When you think of the Earth Clock. Think of The Long Past. The current year is 4540202015. The Earth began accreting and taken present form from the calcium-aluminium-rich inclusions and meteorites in existence 4.54 billenia, 202 millenia, and 15 years ago.

          In terms of the Milky Way Clock. We’re at 13200202015. Think of the Long Future.

          In terms of the Long View of the Universe Clock, the year is 13820202015. This is the number of years since the Big Bang. Just think of all our ancestors. From the earliest humans, to our component elements themselves, that compose us, and all of our forebears.

          Imagine the descendants still to come. We have until 18828202015 when the sun runs out of fuel. That is assuming our part of the Milky Way survives the collision with the immense Andromeda Galaxy in the Universal Year of 17828202015.

          Long Now – Owen Tromans

          Sadie’s on the fault-line waiting for a shift
          Down in Southern California where they get the lift
          From the East Pacific Rise to San Gabriel peaks
          Palmdale and Frazier and aseismic creep

          She’s on Antelope Valley burning through fuel
          ‘Cause she heard a rumor, something sacred and cool
          Like the Bay and the Point and the shivering dark
          She told me about The Catch in Candlestick Park

          Somewhere in the desert there’s a ticking clock
          And when the big one comes that boy won’t stop
          Up in the mountain, chime for every year
          Sounding out pure when we’ve all disappeared

          And Sadie knows running down the fault’s spine
          We’re all just match-flames humbled by time
          We need to think in thousands, build something forever
          Fire up the lamps, set it down together

          She says, “Nations are fictions imposed by our rulers,
          The physical map of the world is much cooler.”
          Cause plates will move and we’ll all lose
          Those tired old flags we didn’t choose

          The Long Now Foundation’s 10,000 Year Clock

  9. The car won’t start after refilling windshield washer fluid. Or using hand sanitizer. Or gargling with mouthwash. Egads!

  10. The only point I’d disagree, unless proved wrong naturally, is the Mandatory installation of DADDs in older cars. As far as I can tell no “safety” item has ever been forced retrofit.
    In the past at least the relatively short life cycle of cars, under 10years, really made it unnecessary to slay that dragon. It would be interesting to know how many cars on the road registered today that at are even 20+ years old. But it may change since cars do last much longer with much less maintenance these days.

    • It has never happened because it has been successfully fought thus far. In the 1980s and 90s there were numerous efforts, political, even legislative, to rid the nation of dangerous and dirty old cars. Sometimes retrofits but usually crusher programs. The only ones that have made it into law and worked are where government pays inflated prices for the old cars and destroys them or creates some bogus pollution credit system that inflates the value of the old cars. But that doesn’t mean retrofits and worse haven’t been proposed.

      • Hi Brent,


        And – in the ’80s and ’90s – there was still a very strong, politically active “old car” hobby. My sense of things is that’s dissipated significantly, in part and perhaps chiefly because it is graying. And so, retiring from the field…

        Also, the culture and attitudes have changed. The “safety” neurosis is now very mainstream. It was a pathetic object of ridicule in the ’80s.

        • And it will only take ONE mandatory item to open the floodgates. Once it happens it will be nearly impossible to stop the following items they want. They only have to be “successful” once. We have to be successful “every” time, and at some point, one will be lost. That loss will happen as fewer fight.

          In some ways we have already lost. Automakers once fought adding items they didn’t want, they don’t anymore. We haven’t been able to block airbags for example, even the right to turn off the airbag in a two seater car (or pickup) so you can bring a child with was fought tooth and nail by the regulators.

          I think it will be the “driverless” car that will begin the end of the “grandfathered” cars. I think it will be very difficult (and expensive) to retrofit even the cars made today. So every car on the road would have to go. It won’t be just classic cars, it will be cars your still paying for. They will go after the cars of today, few of which are loved. A rock star will never write a popular song about how he loves his Accord.

          It will make it much harder to bring in computer driven cars, when you still have people driving themselves. At least that will be the excuse for banning people from driving. Even problems caused by computers will only result in less human interaction believe it or not.

          Don’t get me wrong I am not a luddite. Driverless cars would be great for many people. They will be great for those that are disabled, or are too old to drive anymore or if your drunk. They would be handy for parents to send a empty car for their kids (though I doubt empty vehicles or cars with only minors in them will be allowed). Cars would be far easier to share too (own one instead of two), if they allow empty cars to travel (doubtful). I imagine many clovers would want to stop driving themselves which would be a good thing.


          It would make cars even more appliance like, even more so then they are already. They will be blob like (ugly), as more characteristics are no longer “necessary”. They won’t speed for example, so it will take an advantage of private cars away (speeding to make up time).

          Since driving is being made more annoying, most people will be fine with not driving. That’s the angle that most people will surrender.

          Computer driven cars should be subservient to humans driven ones. But the elite won’t want that.

          • Richb wrote: Automakers once fought adding items they didn’t want, they don’t anymore. We haven’t been able to block airbags for example, even the right to turn off the airbag in a two seater car (or pickup) so you can bring a child with was fought tooth and nail by the regulators.

            The auto makers are living in fear of the Chinese and Indian manufacturers. Anything they can do to make it harder for them to move into the North American market is good business. Pile on mandatory extras and it makes it much harder for the Chinese to compete.

            I’m a ham radio operator. for a long time there were 3 major manufacturers of radios, all of whom were Japanese. A few years ago a few Chinese companies started selling radios at 1/10th the price of a basic Japanese radio. The “big 3” manufacturers have no idea how to compete at that level. They’re loading up new features on their expensive radios with mostly mixed sales. No one is even considering their low end “starter” radios anymore, even with features like easy programming and expanded receivers.

            When the South Koreans entered the market with a very low cost, competitive product it nearly killed Chrysler. Don’t think for a minute that GM isn’t going to do everything it can to make everyone play by the same rules.

          • I have long considered the idea of flipping the laws in the opposite direction via petitions. For example: Get a large number of people to sign petitions requesting a law that requires surveillance cameras that can be publicly monitored installed around politicians houses, work places, and eating/drinking establishments for “safety” purposes. Of course the government would not comply to the results of such a vote; but this fact would open more peoples eyes up to the lawlessness of their elected so-called leader.
            Alas, I am not a good enough public speaker to pull something like this off, I invite anyone here who is good at marketing to take my idea. This idea can be expanded in many other ways.

        • Indeed. The old car hobby fought and largely defeated the efforts of the control freaks and auto manufacturers that tacitly went along with it.

          Back in the 1990s I read the legislative column in HMN regularly. Called ‘Stella Says’ I think. I wish I had saved them. People scarcely believe that stuff happened now. I started hearing about proposed forced mass exterminations of pre 1980 cars in 1987 or so. Imagine trying that now, demanding any car over the age of 7 be destroyed.

          Right now there’s enough big money in the hobby so government isn’t trying anything but to go after cars at the bottom of the depreciation curve. (cash for clunkers) In the next couple decades though they may make another move if the hobby weakens.

          • “In the next couple decades though they may make another move if the hobby weakens.”BrentP

            If the hobby weakens? In my area it has weakened big time. I’m 36 and I’m a child at any car show I have ever been to. My two year old boy could be the great great grand child of 50% of the people there and the grand child of 49% of them. Hell people who “like cars” now days don’t go to car shows, work on cars or know what a piston is, let alone a carb, unless they’re talking about food. They like all of the new shit. They are waiting for apple and google to drive their car for them. That’s what they like. They can’t fathom driving without a seat belt or not having air bags………’s dangerous. They embrace their slavery. The safety god reigns supreme.

            I hear the echos of Nazi Germany……if you aren’t drinking, you have nothing to worry about. The Faux goals of government–100% safety. They have their “schools” to beat it into kid’s muddled little heads. And it is working quite well.

            • Do not judge by shows. Younger people ‘meet’ in online forums and have their own get togethers. The car show crowd is a bunch of old men that want to keep their clubs just the way they are. The typical car shows aren’t very friendly for anyone under 50.

              • Brent,

                I hope you’re right. Just have my doubts. I don’t see the love for the freedom that cars offer in people 10 years younger than I am. I really really hope you are right.

                • Lots of kids in the mustang forums. They often have older SN95s like my ’97. The old-man car shows generally do not allow anyone with a car newer than the late 1970s. But they probably made that rule 20 years ago.

                  When I was in HS a ’69 Mustang was allowed in car shows, it was 18 years old. Today I have an 18 year old Mustang. It is not allowed or not welcomed at these shows. Officially it’s “too new”. The reality is it’s about keeping the club the club. Today it would be like having a car show in the 1980s and saying pre-world war 2 cars only.

                  I was at a car show a couple years ago. This teenage kid shows up in some big old Tbird if I remember right. Then I hear the conversation between two old guys… ‘isn’t that so and so’s car?’…. ‘yeah so and so died and left his grandson the car’. By the tone my interpretation was it was a story of why it was ok for the kid to be there. If I remember right the kid didn’t stay long.

                  I’ve got other stories but if you want to find the kids search online forums and see where they are meeting up. You’ll probably find them.

                  • Old man car shows ha ha ha ha. There actually are car shows for various age cars, many pre-war or pre-50 or 60.

                    I recall seeing my first Miura in ’68 or ’69 and it was an old car, probably 3 years old but man, did it ever blow me away.

                    And yep, I like seeing the old stuff. Nothing wrong with a Stang like yours but it’s not of the age when cars were that different thing they are now.

                    I saw a TA about the same age as your car yesterday that someone had rebuilt, repainted, put some really low profile tires on with something like original wheels. it wasn’t over 2 inches off the street. It looked weird too. I’d bet it would run like a scalded dog and handle well too. If they’d just stayed with some original wheel/tire combo it would have looked really good. I’m sure the young crowd liked it since it was a couple really young guys in it.

                    Well, there’s no going back and nobody at “old man” car shows wants to see those cars. Now an old Anglia with a BBC and an old supercharger with a couple 4 barrels stuck on top and a magneto, now that gets your attention.

                    You know it’s an old man show when guys are in electric wheel chairs and the ambulatory carry their oxygen bottle.

                    • What I am talking about is the exclusion of younger crowd. The only people around here who do things like ‘pre-war only’ shows are some rich mf’rs and they do it for the same reason, to keep it restricted to those in the club. You’re not going to find teenagers there either.

                      I remember the 70s and 80s. The cars that are so great now were just considered POS used cars and gas guzzlers by most people. They weren’t considered something special. Now that club of people who bought them as cheap cars back in the day or paid a lot to relive that time or get the car they never could have are all 50+ years old. But at the start the general public didn’t care any more than they do about my 18 year old Mustang.

                      My ’97 is a totally different character from a new car. At least as different as a ’69 to an ’87.

                      The rules always exist to keep the ‘riff-raff’ out. And going to some car show where old men control the rules and then lamenting the hobby is dying because there’s nobody there under 25 years old is unfounded because the old men have set it up to keep those people out. Saying the cars don’t have the same ‘character’ or ‘feel’ or whatever is just rationalizing the rules instead of simply admitting the social nature of the events and the people at them.

                    • BrentP, ever been to a “truck” show, loads of blinged out pickups, generally so tall as to need a ladder to get into. Mirrors on the hood so you can see the engine from the top.

                      I went to one to speak to a guy about a different sort of liner that would not only do trucks but floors, roofs, etc.

                      I was as old as the age of 3 of the other attendants combined for the most part. Reckon they planned that show to keep out old guys?

                      I appreciated the clothes the girls didn’t have on more than the machines on display.

                    • “I appreciated the clothes the girls didn’t have on more than the machines on display.”
                      LOL, you dirty old man. (takes one to know one)

        • eric, if they won’t start, why will they continue to run. Car dead on the side of the road. Thug with badge couldn’t care less normally but now he’s hell on wheels cause he’s got a “criminal”. So you clear the car of occupants and get someone it will start for…..then what happens? If everyone it didn’t like before climbs back in won’t it stop again. Texas has drinking while driving and open container laws. No matter if you aren’t drunk, if you have simply have an open drink or beer in the car or an empty container, you have broken the law. And will the law they passed last year requiring rear seat belt use shut it down too? Now you can’t even get some sleep in the back seat in Tx. legally.

          I might just get a plane and take my chances.

        • As cars get more complicated and electronically-controlled, they are harder to self-maintain and restore. The car companies can just stop the production of the various controller chips that keep the vehicle running to force them to be scrapped when (eventually) the electronics fails.
          Also, I cannot see too many cars out of the current crop inspiring the affection that older models do. They all look and drive the same for the most part. In other words, they have become expensive appliances.

  11. Not that I am recognizing the legitimacy of the Constitution. But if the gunvermin would just restrict itself to the limitations set out therein, the whole world would be a much better place.

    • PtB – If only the gun-vermin would just follow the Constitution. After all, they claim it’s the supreme law of the land. But as you implicitly point out, none of us that yet remain extant were party to that little exercise in usurpation. It means about as much now as the so-called “social contract” (which isn’t worth the paper it’s not written on). The dead giveaway of what the Constitution really is has been laid bare for us at Article I, Section 8: “Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes…” and so on and so forth. How come it doesn’t say “Congress shall be strictly limited to the following duties” or words of the like?

      • the Constitutional Convention was called by the states to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Instead they completely replaced it, and called for it to be ratified by the people instead of the state legislatures, as the Articles had been. Not that they were perfect either, shoot even the various States were problematic to one degree or another.
        But it was a coup d’etat, as Gary North calls it in his book Conspiracy in Philadelphia.

      • Theoretically, the limit comes in the requirement of an oath to uphold said words. But when people do not believe in an omnipotent God, such oaths have no teeth. In that case, the only limit is what the sheeple will put up with.

        • Magical thinking is the problem. The kids who are conditioned to believe in an omnipotent God. Are just as easily conditioned to believe in an omnipotent Government.

          Things used to be better, because nobody could afford magical thinking where it mattered. No one said: “let kids be kids.” No one was foolish enough to set aside indoctrination time for kids. Be it about God or about Government.

          Kids were young adults, who were expected to work. And to be mindful of the bottom line and not cost the household undue expenses.

          None of this had anyhing to do with God. This had to do with survival and rational thinking. Both of which took precedence over magical considerations.

          You are bemoaning the breakdown of a magical system. You might just as well shed tears over the loss of worshipping fire. Or praying to the spirits to bring rain. Incredibly, you are nostalgic for the pre-technological days when everyone lived hand to mouth and was constantly mal-nourished and riddled with disease.

          That kind of magical yearning, is utter madness. At least in the past, the time for omnipotent God came only after the chores were done and the day’s work was completed. Now days, magical thinkers think you should dream first, and only take action, if your dreams didn’t work their voodoo for you, with no effort on your part.

          The best way to deal with religious discussions, is not to have them. I have religion in my personal and family life. Mostly for them, and not for me personally. But I would never seek to coordinate it with others with whom I don’t have such close ties. That is a surefire way to introduce errors and superstitions into my life. I have enough magical tendencies all by myself, why add the burden of others as well?

          Magical thinking necessarily leads one to Collectivism. To wishing for others to live the way you do. That is the great evil we are all struggling against. To say we need to discuss omnipotent God with each other, is a kind of defeatist suicidal notion. It is a way of shooting each other in the foot, and losing the battle before we even begin it.

          In your mind, it is a small thing to ask. And for the people’s benefit. That they should believe in an omnipotent God. But your wishfullness should set off a red flag in your mind. How can it be a good idea, that you wish for another man to live his life for you, or for your specific notion of an omnipotent God.

          The answer, which I’m sure you know, if you are honest, is it can’t be a good idea. You know full well that you should live the life that you have found is best for you. You should serve the principles you in your heart know are the best for you.

          And that you should permit everyone else to live the life that is best for them. The only limit being, neither of you interfere with the other.

          Find the error within yourself, and work to remove it. The oaths made with words never work, whether you have 100% faith. Or 0% faith.

          The only oaths that ever make a difference are the ones made with actions. And actions don’t need any kind of magical wishes to make them happen. Action are things that just get done. With or without words or magical feelings and sentiments.

          • I can agree with some points you make, but disagree with others. I don’t see the error of believing in an omnipotent god. The error comes from men mingling their opinions of what that omnipotent god would have us do.

            I can’t speak for Phillip, but I believe he is trying to say that if people recognize their rights as coming from an omnipotent creator, it doesn’t really matter how any person defines said creator. No one can prove to me that my creator wants me to act in such a way, or not act in other ways. I believe that my creator would have me act in certain manners and treat people a certain way. That is not to say that my creator wants me to tell others how to conduct their lives. That’s all personal between each individual and their maker. If it isn’t violating another’s property rights, it isn’t wrong. I believe that’s how my creator would have it. He gave me a ownership of my body and delegated it to no one else. Outside of persuasion, I can go no further–rightfully–telling people what is right and wrong.

            The religion of the state is where people go wrong. Believing that theirs a sovereign, monopoly entity with immunity that must decide in matters of right and wrong. Many religions teach subservience to the state, making “god” their second god. They can make all of their creeds and mingle their opinions of godliness in with what it actually is, but that doesn’t change God.

            My god wants for each individual to have absolute property rights. I will agree to that. When the creeds of religion teach subservience to the state as being godly, I simply say not the god I know. The God I believe in said that there are no other gods before Him.

            • “The religion of the state is where people go wrong. Believing that theirs a sovereign, monopoly entity with immunity”

              Should read there’s an earthly, sovereign monopoly entity with immunity.

            • I have tried it both ways. Not spending time interacting with a segregated part of my mind that is called “the omnipotent being” is by far the one that gets better results.

              Perhaps naively believing in an omnipotent something releases endorphins and makes me “feel better” but there’s always the crashing back to reality, when you’ve ignored something for too long, and it has finally decided to bite you on the posterior.

              Endorphins have their place. The feelings of euphoria, modulation of appetites, releases of beneficial hormones, and enhancements of the immune response. All good things. If thinking of an omnipotent being does this for you. Great. With high endorphin levels, we feel less pain and fewer negative effects of stress. If its working for you, it’s good.

              Just don’t overstep, nor project. Don’t conclusively argue for things when you offer no evidence.

              Would you say I should pray for what I want. Or engage in child’s play about how nice it would be if things were how I like them. There’s a case to be made for staying youthful, the trick is to do it in a helpful way.

              I suppose all the movies I watch are exactly like religion. They’re an escape from reality, just like religious devotion and contemplation is. If PtB spends his time thinking about God, and I spend the same time watching a movie. Maybe his way is better than mine. At least he is doing his own imagining, I am watching screen where someone else has already done the imaginative work for me.

              I wish I could be more brief, but it seems like i get quite wordy when discussing these matters. Oh well.

              Everything I write is speculative. Because that is what words are for. To speculate. No mere words or ideas can be omnipotent. Especially not words about God or Government.

              Certainly there could be some sentient being that is more omnipotent than myself. Perhaps one of far greater life-span, who considers myself a single instance of him. My duty being one to make mistakes and find new solutions, which this supposed being could learn from and adapt and use to improve himself.

              Even if that is the case, the way I could best serve this “creator” would be to live my individual life to the fullest, and not spend too much time contemplating who has constructed me and for what purpose. What would be most helpful was to take action and to do things. To fail and learn from failure in a unique and individual way. Of what value is it, that what you create, contemplate its navel, and wallow in a mudhole of sentiment and feeling about being created by some other being?

              If I had a second chance, I wouldn’t have wasted time asking an imagined omnipotent force help me achieve my goals. I would have asked real-world actual people to help. For me, it became a kind of magical autism, where instead of communicating with friends and family about what I wanted from them. I acted in an artificial way around them, and kept my true desires and hopes a secret, and discussed them with an internal authority. In other words, i discussed them with nobody at all.

              I consider beliefs in omnipotent beings to be something for women and children. They certainly have a place at some stage in our lives, but not necessarily for a man in his later life. The more you grow up and mature, the less you should have need for this crutch or imaginary friend. Do you believe in protecting your family with a firearm. Or in protecting them with prayer and appeal to an omnipotent being. The man with a firearm is an adult male. The man with only a mystical being, better at least have a close friend or family member with a firearm, or he’ may eventually find himself in a very bad place.

              Only action and results can be judged. There are some men of great accomplishment who believe in omnipotent superiority of themselves as part of a chosen people, or chosen nation and culture. The 18 million Jews have distinguished themselves. The Japanese have proven themselves a cut above.

              But the 2.3 billion Christians seem only to have outperformed to the extent they have been part of a technological and economic revolution. It is those who cooperate and learn great technical skills that excel. There is no evidence that those of high religiosity do better than those of no religiosity. Quite the opposite. The egalitarian Christians do the worst of advanced Western societies. It is those who are members-only and segregated that are on top.

              • Don’t worry about the length of some of your posts Tor. If I couldn’t read them, that would be my problem, not yours. I usually enjoy your posts–long, short and in between.

                I can see where you are coming from. I can’t say I disagree with you on many points.

        • I tried to respond to this with a couple links showing the founding fathers with the main exception of John Jay were not christians. GW would often go to church and leave early. He said himself he was not a communicant, had never been. Much of same can be said for most of the founding fathers.

          Many lamented those who tried to link govt. and religion rightly identifying religion as the biggest threat to a just govt. by the people.

          John Adams said: “Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion.”

          Thomas Jefferson said: “The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God.”
          “The serious enemies are the priests of the different religious sects to whose spells on the human mind its improvement is ominous.”
          “I join you [John Adams], therefore, in sincere congratulations that this den of the priesthood is at length broken up, and that a Protestant Popedom is no longer to disgrace the American history and character.”
          “In every country and in every age the priest [any and every clergyman] has been hostile to liberty; he is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.”
          “I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies.”

          They had good reason to think this since most everyone who first came to American did so because of “religious persecution”. They then committed exactly that same religious persecution themselves. The difference was simply a difference of the religion they chose.

          If there’s ever been a govt. that came close to freedom with religion as it’s origin I’m not aware of it.

          The actual view that this country was founded by christians and not people calling mother nature or the universe “god” as most were deists of some sort and did refer to a greater power as god, are those who wish to rewrite history, the revisionists, to make their own religion seem more powerful or relevant.

          It’s like the old tired argument that without a christian belief you have no grounds for morality. That would have a huge portion of the world’s people as being immoral. I don’t think most thinking people would believe such.

          • “If there’s ever been a govt. that came close to freedom with religion as it’s origin I’m not aware of it. ” – Try the Rhode Island colony and Providence Plantation.

          • Many of the founders weren’t Christians–by today’s standards. If Christian is defined as a belief in Christ, many of the founders were Christian.

            • Christ wasn’t widely believed to have existed even by those who would not deny some great entity or entities, esp. those men who first held the office of President and people such as Thomas Paine who was highly regarded by everyone if only after his Age of Reason was written. Some even speculated it there was a single god, he would not be concerned with man or there might be many “gods” that served one.

              They all had one thing in common though, that no religion should be associated with govt.

              • Unfortunately our present gunvermin want us all to believe they have been ordained by God to rule over us (and the rest of the world), anyone questioning this notion is a heretic fit to be put down. Every time I hear a slimeball pol say “God bless Amerika” I want to puke. God forgive Amerika would be more appropriate.

    • Not that I am recognizing the legitimacy of the Constitution.

      I finally had to respond. That’s what the worst criminal in American history said in his own uneducated way. Except the Shrub said a fuckin piece of paper(if you believe the people that were there and not the controlled MSM). Well, if you can’t beat em, join em I guess.

      But that piece of paper is what this entire country including govt. is supposed to be based on.

      Almost no other nation in the world has actual (excuse me, HAD)freedom of speech. Speak your mind in any of those European countries with “free” views and watch them haul your butt to jail. Speak your mind in most other countries in the world and don’t get to finish.

      It IS what the Constitution stands for. It was for a few years anyway. It was attacked from at least the moment George got on his horse after being prez, rounded up some good old killers and went after the farmers who grew grain and made some whiskey. Nothing in the Constitution said anything about the govt. having any power to control the production of alcoholic spirits but you couldn’t have told it by what happened then.

      If the bastard Lincoln hadn’t eviscerated everything left in the Constitution, we might be semi-free even now. But those powers of old, in Europe paid well to have their system of govt. instituted instead…..the govt. of new Rome, an armed state conquering and stealing from everyone including its citizens.

      It still chaps my butt we don’t have the right nearly every other citizen in every country has, the right to distill. We still live under an illegal law dreamed up just a few years into this country’s history by greedy bureaucrats, judges, politicians and, as my wife and I refer to bad behavior in the house, “the usual suspects”.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here