[Porsche-O-Phile]

Kind of what I was thinking. This whole thing about "driving is a privilege" is really problematic. Think about it - whose tax dollars pay for the streets? Are you allowed to use those streets? No. Not without paying an EXTRA fee, taxes, surcharges, etc. for the "privilege" of doing so. Seems pretty shaky logic to me. How can a government take away (via eminent domain or whatever other methods used) private property rights to build a public right-of-way under the argument of "public need" or "public interest" and then simulataneously restrict - or outright PROHIBIT its use except if one is willing to make pretty substantial additional concessions? It's like me going into my neighbor's yard and fencing in half his yard, then saying if he wants to use it, he'll have to pay me and also give up any constitutional rights he has in order to do so. Seems kind of a reach to me. . .

Like I said, I don't know why this bugged me so much (I suppose I should just be grateful they were out "supposedly" targeting drunk drivers) but it seems awfully problematic and raises a lot of other issues - most of which don't sit too well with me.