Since when was there a federal seatbelt law? Good grief do the Paulites even understand the federalism they pretend to espouse? If Paul is complaining about non-existent federal seatbelt laws he's even dumber than I thought.

I forgot to mention that people who are hit by other cars and who don't wear their seatbelt end up forcing other people to pay for higher medical costs.

@ Putin,

You obviously don't understand the difference between Private Law and Public Municipal Law.

@Putin: in that case whats the problem, there is currently no legislation against again what paul is saying, so whats the issue?

MM: "Who is bringing the criminal complaint against the person ticketed for driving without a seatbelt?"

Putin: "The State."

Actually, that was a trick question. In 99.9% of all traffic cases, the criminal complaint is signed by the Clerk of the Court, and there is never a charging instrument issued -- that is a violation of Due Process. Why?

VOTE FOR NADER 2012! I support Nader.

"Actually, that was a trick question. In 99.9% of all traffic cases, the criminal complaint is signed by the Clerk of the Court, and there is never a charging instrument issued -- that is a violation of Due Process. Why?"

What is the point of your question? To act like a condescending know-it-all because you took a law course? The point is seat belt violations incur social costs. I don't really care if you think seat belt laws are tyrannical. The fact that you people spend this much time bitching about having to wear a seat belt instead of important issues is why you're not a serious movement.

"...condescending know-it-all..."

Pot, meet kettle! You comment on nearly EVERY thread in here as if you are the absolute authority on the subject. You condescend everyone that disagrees with you and then label people -- as evidenced by your "...you people..." comment above. I am not part of any "movement". I participated in this discussion not because I am a Ron Paul supporter but because traffic laws are avenue by which the average person most often interacts with the legal system, and it is one of the most glaring illustrations of how the government has tricked the people and are utilizing "statutes" to oppress the We the People. You talk about "social costs" but you're once again having your "save the world" strings pulled, and you're missing the blatant revenue generation and invasion of peoples' privacy that traffic laws afford the government.

Our Republic has been hijacked, usurped, and our system of justice have been replaced by a system of adhesion contracts and commercial limited liability. Please don't condescend me Putin. I have completed 2 years of my J.D., but I promise you, very little of what I am talking about is taught in law school.

You always come of a angry in these discussions, and I don't know why. All your angry rhetoric does is display your profound ignorance.

How can you people sit through the republican debates? This little group of second- and third-rate losers ain't goin' nowhere. The Repubs will pick Romney (not stupid arrogant Gingrich) and lose. We're stuck with Obama for four more years, so get used to it.

Ah yes, traffic laws are oppression. What a joke. Talk about something that matters for once, instead of acting like a petulant child who can never be told what to do.

You're a joke Putin, an angry jackass of a joke.

Do as you're told like a good little slave that you are!

Fucking moron!

Nevermind indefinite detainment without charge, its.*traffic* laws which are oppressive! Keep speaking truth to power, militia man.

Since when have libertarians cared about slavery? By all accounts those were halycon days limited government according to libertarian mythology.

I am not a libertarian. Stop trying to paint me with your broad strokes. Obviously traffic laws aren't the NDAA or the Patriot Act, but they are where people interact with the government, and are very useful to "awaken" people to the oppressive and tyrannical manner in which the government interacts with the people. Get people to see how the gov't violates their rights and their due process on something a seemingly insignificant as a traffic stop and speeding ticket, and they become more aware of the larger more important oppressive issues.

For the People of this Republic to take it back, and restore it, they have to be aware that they've lost it, and nothing facilitates this awareness better than seeing their due process unabashedly trampled for something as simple as speeding ticket. People being to wonder, "if they're willing to lie to me and violate my rights right to my face over this relatively petty issue, what else are they lying to me about?!?"

Get it?!?

The sad irony of this whole debate is that you think you're zinging me when you called me a "libertarian" or call me a "militia man". When in actual fact you're simply showing that you've been brainwashed by the media, and you just spout of catch phrases that you're told discredit someone's views.

I am very close with people here in Austin that have done an incredible amount of research into the Transportation Codes, and they have come up with some very startling conclusions. Things aren't what we're told they are Putin. You call me anything you like, but I know the truth. You're disparaging words are only evidence of the fact that the prisoners will viciously defend and guard the prison. If you would just listen for once in your life, and stop with the "chip on your should" intellectual bullying you might actually begin to see things for what they are, not what you want them to be.

Amusing to have Putin defend the traffic ticket revenue system, which hurts the proles worst of all. Those $400 tickets for missing a yellow light by half a second are absolutely ruinous to the working poor he pretends to care about. That can be a month's wages after taxes for some low-skilled laborer making minimum wage when you throw in the increased (government mandated) insurance costs. Guess those poor people just need to swallow their pride and get on welfare to cover the expense, effectively transferring the money from one government department to another government department (minus a handling fee, of course), and giving the highly profitable insurance companies an excuse to wring more money from people who really can't afford it.

What a dishonest and sad sack. He obviously cares first and foremost about the expansion of state power. The poor people who are trod under the state's oppressive boot, like the heroic Mohamed Bouazizi (whose death anniversary is today)? They don't really matter. Pests to be waved away like an annoying housefly.

I'm sure Putin - being the proud elitist that he is - would have told him "quit whining like those libertarians and just pay up, you worthless Prole!" and rolled his eyes at his immolation.

I've met and worked alongside communists before on local political issues. I strenuously disagreed with them on economics and a few other issues, of course, but I've generally considered them good and honest people who were very concerned about the less fortunate. Putin, though, in his statements over the months on this forum, is the first communist to give me a strong whiff of psychopathy.

@Putin
You completely discredit the Austrian school in favor of Keynesian economics? I've been on both sides of this issue, and well Keynesian economics is a good idea in the theory of spending your way out of a depression, presidents have racked up debt regardless of the financial situation instead of balancing the budget when the economics are good so you have money to spend when depressions and recessions occur.

As far as calling MM condescending, that is ridiculous. Every word out of your mouth, whether I agree with it or not, is condescending. You act as though you know what you're talking about on every single issue, but you obviously don't, so stop trying to put up this false facade of intellectual brilliance. If you were part of the intelligentsia you so desperately attempt to portray yourself as belonging to, I doubt you would be spending your time mixing words with MM and myself

$400 red light tickets? Wow! Where do you live? My worst ticket to date was $130 for doing 80 in a 70 zone on the highway.

Tolsty and patizcool...very well said!

why should there be any sort of ad hominem in a political debate? if you are forced to resort to name calling no matter what side you are on you seem to be declaring that you do not beleive your arguments to be sufficient to prove your point. if you are willing to so blatantly make that declaration, why argue and not just listen?