Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Drivers' licenses are already used for "social engineering" purposes, which is to say, to screw with people the licensing authority doesn't like.
|
Do you really believe that? Do you think there's
no good purpose to making sure people have at least a rudimentary knowledge of how to drive a vehicle before we let them drive 65 MPH on the highway? I don't think so. A driver's license is supposed to (and I say "supposed to" because people don't get retested) ensure that you at least know the fundamentals of driving before you get behind the wheel. It's also useful to track people's infractions so that someone whose driving privileges have been revoked doesn't continue to drive (at least, in theory).
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Parenting licesenses sound like a great idea until you realize it will be someone else who decides who is qualified and who isn't, and they will decide whether you are qualified or not.
|
The training that such a license would require isn't unprecedented. Parents are sometimes required to take classes to regain custody of their children, for example. All I'm talking about is a requirement for parents to show some competence
beforehand, rather than after they've already screwed up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Do you really truth your current government to make that decision for you?
|
I would trust the government with that just as much as I'd trust them with any other kind of government-mandated training (which includes public education). And I'd certainly trust the government more to set minimum standards than I would trust the average 18-year old to come up with them on their own. How much of a burden do you think it would be on the average citizen? You can probably answer that by asking how many people fail their written driving tests and as a result, never get licenses. Don't you think parents should go through at least
that much training?