Wow, that has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

 

....There goes my garage

 

i say yes they should for the simple fact of in higher powered sports cars if you wanna take them to the track and run a 1/4 time you wont be able to because im sure they will need to trap over 100mph in a 1/4. and they can stop them from making them but they cant ban them from the streets thats insane. what happened to America being a free country?!?!?!

 

almost as bad as plate frames being illegal in MA

 

I wish the government would stop trying to protect ourselves from ourselves.

I agree with enforcement of speed limits on the streets (although I think highway limits should be higher).

Maybe a compromise would be to limit or prevent a habitual offender from buying a high performance car or even a car at all for that matter.

 

I think thats fair Tadcaster although you basically need a car to be suffcient on your own. maybe when you have a serious offense have a limitation to cars under 200hp

 

Eh, not sure I totally agree....
- 1 - It is a privilege to drive, not a right. In theory, I should be able to own any car but does not mean I have the privilege to drive it on public road ways.
- 2 - Limiting on HP is not the right way to go as all vendors try to "raise the bar". Eventually I am sure we won't have 200HP cars and that ruling would have to increase.
- 3 - As mentioned, in a greater part of at least the U.S., you do need a car to be sufficient. It should take serious crimes to limit your privilege to drive or the vehicles you are allowed to drive. Speeding tickets I don't feel are sufficient.
- 4 - Keep in mind, the courts can raise fines for moving violations and your car insurance does increase when you get ticketed (or at least after you pay it). There is something already in place to discourage crazy driving.

I completely agree with Tad, the Government needs to spend less time saving us from ourselves. I heard certain cities (or states) are now looking to impose laws to hurt a fast food restaurant from selling "unhealthy" food. Seriously?? Last time I checked, I did not need the Government to regulate how much greasy food I put in my mouth, that to me is a fundamental violation of my civil liberties and what's next, they tell me what time to go to bed and get up??

 

BTW - Currently, six people voted "yes" to this pole, yet I don't think I saw anyone comment on "yes", all comments are against. I would find it interesting to hear some of these six people state why "yes"....

 

No no no no no no.

We already have government involved in just about everything, let's not make the problem bigger. Say no to nanny state, say yes to personal responsibility and liberty.

If everyone took care of their own and stopped being dependent on government for safety, then we wouldn't have a problem. It's amazing how this always turns out to be a numbers argument in regards to the amount of traffic deaths. I'm not antagonizing anyone directly but it's much like a weapons ban argument.

People will die in a free society. I'd rather die horribly in a free and prosperous society rather than live in a controlled and limited one.