First of, driving a car isnt a right
Lots of people say that, mostly because they hear governments say that. It's a load of manure.
I dont nessecarily disagree with thos saying driving IS a right. It's obvious that being allowed freedom to travel IS is right, and certainly in modern times, a car is almost required to do that, however, one doesnt need to be able to PERSONALLY drive the car to be able to reasonably travel IMHO.someone else could drive, one can fly, use trains, taxis, buses, etc.I admit its a tough one, and I didnt really like typing that, but it wasnt really my point. I was trying to find a way to get into the rest of what I said, and that was what came out, and I am personally on the fence about DRIVING being the right, vs TRAVEL being the right, as I know MANY others here are on the fence, as well as on either side, since it's been discuseed MANY times.For those saying the act of driving is a right, why do you then think licensing, mandatory trainging, and registration is OK for that right, but not for the RKBA, or the right to speak freely, etc? THAT's my point. Most people, and the ACLU dont believe that mandatory traing, permits, and licensing should be allowed just to exercise any other rights, so why would they say its ok for the RKBA?
Either way, I think the rest of what I said still stands.They would (as would most people ) FLIP if the govt said you needed to be registered, or have a permit just to TRAVEL (as opposed to being an actual driver.)If the govt said you need a permit to ride a bus, or for someone else to drive you somewhere, or to leave your city, state, etc, the ACLU would go NUTS, as would those of you who are saying DRIVING is a right, but having registartion and a license to do so is OK. I feel its TRAVEL thats the right, not any particular METHOD that is.Certainly most people dont think anyone who buys a plane should be allowed to just hop in and fly it anywhere, anytime withought having some training, a license etc? Thats what I meant there.
My real point was the ACLU is full of it IMHO, and are using the collective rights and allowed permitting/registration thing as a dodge to not support the 2A.My point was that No matter what Heller, or any other court decision says, the ACLU will still not support individual 2A rights for some reason they concoct.
hopefully I explained that a little better, as I wasnt really wanting to debate driving as a right, just point out the ACLU's hypocrisy is what they say is and isnt a right, and what infringments are and arent allowed.