Scott en Aztl‡n
Unless you're too dense to understand it. Should I make it even simpler?
Pretty much all of them. Since you're being intentionally obtuse, here's the point: the type of crash you described occurs as much, if not more often, with young drivers as it does with older ones. Ranting about it without offering any rational solution puts you on about the same level as Rush Limbaugh as a national policymaker.
Yeah; right.
How 'bout we consider it a *larger sampling* than yours?
Watch it sonny, there are holes in that tract you can drive a Peterbilt through. Here's a small sampling:
The Declaration of Independence is not the Consbreastution nor is it the law of the land. It is inspirational, like the Gettysburg Address.
AmJur is a *tertiary* source of legal information. It isn't the law. It isn't a court opinion with the power of precedent based on the law. It is no more than a legal analysis written by a commentator. Depending on it as law will get you into more trouble than its worth.
While the state may place a high value on safe travel, it is not, and never has been, a right except in terms of the state not directly impinging upon it by endangering your safety. It is not your guarantor of safety or you would be able to sue every time that guarantee of right was broken. They try. When they're negligent, or worse (say the STOP sign the guy ran fell down 3 weeks earlier), they're amenable to suit. But if it's a failure to regulate older drivers by testing for suitability to drive, there's no guarantee until there's legislation. So get to work on it and quit whining. -- C.R. Krieger (Not that old)
