TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- banning license plate acronyms where is 1st amendment?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

banning license plate acronyms where is 1st amendment?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105...=news&tag=title

I mean, there are still bumper stickers but if somebody wants to say something on a license plate, why not? Bumper stickers are also notorious for peeling up paint.



So California bans the three letter combos SUK and SUC but not SCK. IS this useful tax dollar spending, or is the only reason they missed this because they aren't paided enough?



Oh and is banning USB on the license plate really useful to anything, anywhere?

Re: banning license plate acronyms where is 1st amendment?

quote:

Originally posted by billymadision because they aren't paided enough?

amphetamine salts in all forms are pretty bad imo.

Are you thinking you are this guy?

IMO they should ban the letter combos they did. Show some respect, no one needs to have suc this on a plate.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata IMO they should ban the letter combos they did. Show some respect, no one needs to have suc this on a plate.

Exactly. And why stop there? Let's ban "bad" or "offensive" language all together. Problem solved.

quote:

Originally posted by DOOMBOT Exactly. And why stop there? Let's ban "bad" or "offensive" language all together. Problem solved.

No, that's not what I was getting at all. License plates are just not the property of the car driver, they are used to verify a person as the vehicle's owner. Since they are used in said manner they should be regulated to what can be said on them IMO.

It's like drawing on someone else coloring book.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata No, that's not what I was getting at all. License plates are just not the property of the car driver, they are used to verify a person as the vehicle's owner. Since they are used in said manner they should be regulated to what can be said on them IMO. It's like drawing on someone else coloring book.

You're not under duress to read the coloring book though. If you drive around in a car without a license plate, you're liable to be pulled over by a cop and bullied around for not having one. It's a little different. And since it is your currency that is being taken from you in order to provide the license plate, I'd say it's a tad ridiculous that you have no say in what goes on it at least.

quote:

Originally posted by DOOMBOT You're not under duress to read the coloring book though. If you drive around in a car without a license plate, you're liable to be pulled over by a cop and bullied around for not having one. It's a little different. And since it is your currency that is being taken from you in order to provide the license plate, I'd say it's a tad ridiculous that you have no say in what goes on it at least.

They are used to catch criminals and write tickets, so your getting bullied by cops either way.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata They are used to catch criminals and write tickets, so your getting bullied by cops either way.

I can totally see the justification to force people who want to drive to have them now.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata No, that's not what I was getting at all. License plates are just not the property of the car driver, they are used to verify a person as the vehicle's owner. Since they are used in said manner they should be regulated to what can be said on them IMO.

Then there shouldn't be any customization available to the general public. Just run with the designated plates and keep it simple.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Then there shouldn't be any customization available to the general public. Just run with the designated plates and keep it simple.

Good point.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata Good point.

Yeah I'm not a big fan of half-assing anything. Either full-customization for a fee, or nothing

americans get upset over the stupidest things.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN americans get upset over the stupidest things.

Exactly the point. First amendment still protects bumper stickers.

Well at least Americans have their precious guns to keep them cuddled in bed.

I don't really give a shit about this issue either way, because it's just a license plate and they're just some acronyms (you've never been able to have "FUCK YOU" or "EAT SHIT" on a plate, so why are you only now making this a first amendment issue?), but...

quote:

Originally posted by billymadision IS this useful tax dollar spending...

... seriously? You really think that this is some egregious waste of tax money? The amount spent on banning these words is paltry compared to what some minimum wage kid at McDonald's makes in a day.

quote:

Originally posted by idoru ... seriously? You really think that this is some egregious waste of tax money? The amount spent on banning these words is paltry compared to what some minimum wage kid at McDonald's makes in a day.

There it is!

Re: banning license plate acronyms where is 1st amendment?

quote:

Originally posted by billymadision Oh and is banning USB on the license plate really useful to anything, anywhere?

I'd also like to know how you're under the impression that "USB" is banned, because that article never mentioned it. Or, are you just retarded?

Not sure how the First amendment applies to someone restricting your ability to express your self on someone else's property.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney Not sure how the First amendment applies to someone restricting your ability to express your self on someone else's property.

I believe it is silly to use the constitution as a defense in pretty much all things that a state does and does not do. Instead, it should be a debate on how moral the thing is and test the logic of it.

Personally, I believe it is immoral to put someone under duress to do something that you want them to do that they would have voluntarily chosen not to do. In this case, people are under duress to stick a license plate on their car if they want to drive. Now, like argued above, people are going to say that it is necessary to force people to do it in order to catch "criminals." Ok, fine. But do you believe it is ok for anyone to approach a peaceful person and use force or violence to get them to do something that you want them to do that they otherwise would not? Personally, I don't believe it is. So logically, I can't agree with forcing people to put a license plate on their car because I don't believe anyone has a right to do that. And it is completely illogical to say that a state does; because by what right do they have to do it? People often answer that the citizens give them that power. The problem with that is that it is illogical to say that someone can give a right that they do not have to someone else.

You were (presumably) entitled to a public education, though. Your transportation to and fro ensured by paved roads paid by public taxes, as is the interest of the public to further monitor and tax presumably legally-obtained vehicles that are kept to inspection of emissions in the interest of further public health.

Even Libertarianism-Lite falls apart when the entitlements of those privileged enough with the luxury of contemplating them in the first place have already expended them.

Montana almost didnt let me have my plates, they arnt even inappropriate :/ even though ive had it for 10.5 years now

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On You were (presumably) entitled to a public education, though. Your transportation to and fro ensured by paved roads paid by public taxes, as is the interest of the public to further monitor and tax presumably legally-obtained vehicles that are kept to inspection of emissions in the interest of further public health. Even Libertarianism-Lite falls apart when the entitlements of those privileged enough with the luxury of contemplating them in the first place have already expended them.

Yes but I even put public roads, public education, and all other public services through the same logical test that I've put the public license plate through. The outcome is still the same. Let's forget about Libertarianism or any other political stamp though because I don't believe it matters in this discussion; not to mention I don't even associate myself with one.

Well nobody coerces you under threat of duress to append a license plate to your vehicle. You can just keep it in your garage and never, ever use the vehicle if the integrity of your property is of such concern.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Well nobody coerces you under threat of duress to append a license plate to your vehicle. You can just keep it in your garage and never, ever use the vehicle if the integrity of your property is of such concern.

That really doesn't address the point I've made though and that is that a peaceful person been forced to use one on their property in the first place. The argument goes all the way back to using force/violence on a peaceful person to get them to do something that they otherwise would not have done. Either you agree or disagree that this is ok. If you disagree, then it is illogical to say it is ok for anyone (whether they have a badge or special uniform or not) to do it.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.