War on Cars Is Underway

Progressives cannot abide the idea of law-abiding citizens owning firearms not because disarming us would make us safer, but because our ability to defend ourselves affirms our independence from the all-powerful State. The ability to go where we want to go, when we want to go there, also characterizes free individuals. That is why if Democrats acquire the power to ban guns, they will next turn their attention to banning cars. Currently, the media is laying the propaganda groundwork.

From a piece in the New York Daily News denouncing the rebuilding of the car-enabling Brooklyn-Queens Expressway:

[C]ars are killing us.

Nearly 40,000 Americans die in traffic collisions every year, many of them because of bad driving by others. That includes 6,283 pedestrians killed last year, or one every 84 minutes.

Wow, that’s a lot worse than gun violence.

Sitting in our cars while we drive everywhere is killing us too, with obesity, diabetes and heart disease. Pollution from our cars is killing us and the planet. Forty percent of America’s carbon greenhouse gases comes from cars and trucks.

By volume, 90% of greenhouse gases consists of water vapor. No worries; liberals won’t ban water until later.

The author not only wants the BQE removed, but calls for the Brooklyn Bridge to be closed “permanently to everyone but people on foot and on bikes.”

When making driving miserable by reducing the number of expressways and bridges fails to get us out of our cars, more direct means will have to be taken.

Our right to bear arms is explicitly stated in the Constitution, yet progressives attack it relentlessly. There is nothing in the Constitution about our right to own cars.

On a tip from Sean C.

moonbattery.com/war-on-cars-is-underway/

Favorite

2 members favorited this

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

Comment by Burbia on November 28, 2019 at 12:00am: "The doctrine of the “right to travel” actually encompasses three separate rights, of which two have been notable for the uncertainty of their textual support. The first is the right of a citizen to move freely between states, a right venerable for its longevity, but still lacking a clear doctrinal basis.2082 The second, expressly addressed by the first sentence of Article IV, provides a citizen of one state who is temporarily visiting another state the “Privileges and Immunities” of a citizen of the latter state.2083 The third is the right of a new arrival to a state, who establishes citizenship in that state, to enjoy the same rights and benefits as other state citizens. This right is most often invoked in challenges to durational residency requirements, which require that persons reside in a state for a specified period of time before taking advantage of the benefits of that state’s citizenship."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-14/section...

Comment by Parrhesia on November 27, 2019 at 12:31pm: JR, No problem and no apology necessary. We're not liberals, so we can disagree and still be friends.

Comment by James Roberts on November 27, 2019 at 11:40am: Indeed. By the way, sorry to get contentious with you on the Iran money thing.

Comment by Parrhesia on November 27, 2019 at 11:30am: JR, UN Agenda to block free travel.

Comment by James Roberts on November 27, 2019 at 11:13am: David Knight talks about this frequently, and about city planners failing to build new roads for commuting into cities.

RSS

Welcome to
12160 Social Network

Sign Up
or Sign In

Or sign in with:

"Destroying the New World Order"