Limiting your rights and freedoms

cashflyer · 12-22-2005, 06:19 AM

I will preface by saying that I'm not trying to bash anyone, but am using current situations to pose a hypothetical question.

It has recently been upheld that the president has the authority to order surveilance of a nature that many believe to be unconstitutional. Many also believe some provisions of the patriot act to be unconstitutional. Regarding both of these topics, the administration has declaired that it is necessary to sacrafice some of our personal rights and freedoms in the name of national security.

I have seen posted on this very forum that oil is the lifeblood of our economy, and that without the availability of oil our country would be dramatically changed, if not fall altogether. I have also heard stated that oil supply is a matter of national security.

The question:
Since continued oil availability is a matter of national security, shouldn't we limit Americans choices of automobiles?
2.0 liter max displacement, 1360kg max curb weight, 25 mpg min acceptable economy. Only commercial operators should need larger vehicles, and should be subject to audits to justify them.

Jeff Higgins · 12-22-2005, 06:30 AM

Elect a Democrat next time and see just how fast we will be subject to those kinds of restrictions.

gaijindabe · 12-22-2005, 06:35 AM

Raise the gas tax. That is only real way consumption could be cut. (Just like post-Katrina.) Let people make their own choices about what they want to drive.

Go ahead and raise it, I dont care. I ride the subway to work, ahem, I walk to work every day! F@#king strike..

Rodeo · 12-22-2005, 06:39 AM

Government policies rewarding conservation are a good thing. Yours is a bit drastic

We generally engage in social engineering though the tax code

cashflyer · 12-22-2005, 07:25 AM

I agree that consumer habits are affected by costs, and that in normal circumstances the result could be achieved through heavy handed taxation. (And the government may prefer that route because of the revenue stream it would generate.)

However, these are desperate times!

I was posing the theory that the wasteful habits of Americans who drive needlessly large vehicles could be seen as a threat to national security. And if this is viewed as a security issue, as opposed to a conservation issue, shouldn't we take drastic action?

Are soccer moms contributing to an eventual demise of America? If so, shouldn't we put her in an econobox and crush that Hummer?

Rodeo · 12-22-2005, 07:36 AM

You can't crush enough Hummers to make me happy.

Well, maybe ALL of them

Wrecked944 · 12-22-2005, 07:37 AM

I think we have the technology to solve these problems available right now. If we build automobiles from carbon fiber and power them with turbo diesel motors fueled with domestic biodiesel, then we can throw the oil monkey off our backs without compromising our liberties. I'm a bit surprised that no car company has yet jumped on this bandwagon because I believe there is HUGE money to made. Perhaps we can use the govt to provide tax breaks and/or research grants to car companies to move these technologies to market rather than restrict our freedoms.

s_wilwerding · s_wilwerding's Garage

What people don't realize is that every law Congress passes limits our freedoms. We're willing to put up with a lot of reasonable limits - for example, we're willing to give up the freedom to murder whoever we want in exchange for security. However, which each law Congress makes, they eke out just a little more of our freedoms.

That is why I hate it when they pass laws for every little thing.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 12-22-2005, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JanusCole
I think we have the technology to solve these problems available right now. If we build automobiles from carbon fiber and power them with turbo diesel motors fueled with domestic biodiesel, then we can throw the oil monkey off our backs without compromising our liberties. I'm a bit surprised that no car company has yet jumped on this bandwagon because I believe there is HUGE money to made. Perhaps we can use the govt to provide tax breaks and/or research grants to car companies to move these technologies to market rather than restrict our freedoms.

I like this and wonder why the gov/NSF/private sector doesn't create a research contest with gov. funding going to the winner.

In the spirit of national security, this contest would be about creating an alternative transportation model. Prizes would be awarded in the areas of cost-effective, lightweight unibody design, drivetrain re-engineering, materials science, etc.

there's certainly enough venture $ in the country to support a real alternative to the big 3. Just look at Balmer and his rocketship contest. Good model to follow.

Wrecked944 · 12-22-2005, 08:01 AM

Yeah, there really is mad money to be made for the people who use our existing technology to solve the oil problem. I was gunho to do some hands on research into biodiesel this past Fall but the Great Flood of 2005 cut me off at the knees. I have a buddy who owns a Mercedes turbodiesel and is willing to try running it on bio. But our proposed biodiesel manufacturing facility (i.e. my basement) ended up under two feet of water and is still leaking. So all of our plans have been temporarily shelved.

Hey man, after you sell G9 for a bazillion bucks, let's start a car company to make ultra-lightweight turbodiesel sportscars and SUV's. I think there is stupid money to be made there.

Joeaksa · 12-22-2005, 08:18 AM

Agree that we do need to do something. These frigging soccer moms who drive a 'burb or hummer around with one kid in it has to end, but so do the guys with the lifted pickup trucks and so on as well.

The majority of us on this forum drive a responsible car, one that gets close to, if not over 20 mpg. As well we are car people so think about things like this. As well how many people have solar heating on their house? I am putting it in for my hot water heater and pool but why doesnt everyone have it? Its heating for free and feel that eventually it will become mandatory.

Unfortunately the only thing that I see changing it is continued high fuel prices. The sooner we wake up the better.

Joe A

Burnin' oil · 12-22-2005, 10:41 AM

We don't need to do anything. The sooner we use up all the oil the better.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 12-22-2005, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JanusCole

Hey man, after you sell G9 for a bazillion bucks, let's start a car company to make ultra-lightweight turbodiesel sportscars and SUV's. I think there is stupid money to be made there.

Can't wait!

Dantilla · 12-22-2005, 12:19 PM

Should we ban all racing and club DE days? What's the point of driving around in circles?

Wrecked944 · 12-22-2005, 12:44 PM

By the way, here is a Toyota prototype from 2004. It has a carbon fiber chassis along with a hybrid gas/electric motor producing 408 peak horsepower with acceleration from 0-60 in just 4.03 seconds...and it gets...wait for it...31 mpg!

Taz's Master · 12-22-2005, 05:09 PM

How about simply limiting the miles driven per licensed driver? Maybe 15,000 per. Check odometers at emmissions testing or yearly inspections, and companies with fleet vehicles can allocate miles to employees (just like employees do when they get reimbursed for milage). Charge for anyone over the threshold by the mile. Having parents who don't drive any more could come in handy. Give credits for alternative fuel vehicles.