Is driving a right or a privilege?

[John Dibble]

I think it's a right, but not a natural one - meaning you have to earn it, and it can be taken away if you abuse it. It's a right in the sense that you as a citizen have the right to equal access to the chance to get a license as all other citizens, just as everyone should have equal access to all government services. Now, driving on someone else's property is a privilege, because only those who have the owner's permission can do so - access is not granted equally to all citizens.

[John Dibble]

I think it's a right, but not a natural one - meaning you have to earn it, and it can be taken away if you abuse it.

That means it's a privilege John.  If someone can take it away, then it's not truly a right.

Well, everything in the world can be taken away from you in some form, so using that criteria, nobody has any rights.

Personally, I consider a "right" to be something that the vast majority of people agree should never be taken away.  Given that hardly anyone argues with taking away the ability to drive from someone who's absolutely incompetent at driving, I therefore don't consider driving a right.

Well, I believe that if there's a government service, you have a right to it if you are a citizen and you qualify. Yes, it can be taken away, but because you are a citizen you can't be denied your license on some arbitrary thing that wouldn't get other people disqualified. In a privilege situation, you can have something denied to you for any reason, and usually this can be done by any individual(such as an individual not giving you the privilege of being allowed to be on his property).

Now, just because you have a right doesn't mean it can't be taken away - gun rights for instance can be taken away legitimately if you become a criminal, because you essentially abuse the right. Since we're all citizens we can all drive if we pass the test, nobody can be denied the a license if they qualify and nobody can have their license taken away unless they no longer qualify to have it. That's just why I view it as a right, because all citizens can have it and the qualifications aren't random to each individual.

[John Dibble]

Its a privilege. I shudder when I think of a day 20 years from now when millions of baby boomers become awful drivers when they hit their seventies, making driving in this country a nightmare.

You would like my law then.  I would make it manditory for all drivers (no matter what their age) to retake their written and driving tests before renewing their drivers license.  Those that do not pass those two cannot receive their license.  Most of your old drivers would then lose their privilege to drive, and some of these college kids would too. 

Nobody would like that law - it would require spending time in the DMV.

To answer Lewis, four years, at least in my state.

[John Dibble]

Its a privilege. I shudder when I think of a day 20 years from now when millions of baby boomers become awful drivers when they hit their seventies, making driving in this country a nightmare.

You would like my law then.  I would make it manditory for all drivers (no matter what their age) to retake their written and driving tests before renewing their drivers license.  Those that do not pass those two cannot receive their license.  Most of your old drivers would then lose their privilege to drive, and some of these college kids would too. 

Nobody would like that law - it would require spending time in the DMV.

To answer Lewis, four years, at least in my state.

Five years in Virginia.  And as far as the testing being expensive, you need to consider that most of the written tests are electronic (you already have the software and computers, so that's not an added expense) as well as the road test graders (salaries and on the clock).  What would need to be done is schedule the tests, which might be an added expense to hire a few more employees.  However, with less drivers on the road causing fewer accidents, money will be saved by repairing the damage caused by accidents as well as lower insurance rates. 

Even with appointments, I imagine that the DMV would be like a doctor's office - you'd still have to wait longer than you should. Probably worse. The DMV is the most inefficient beauracracy in all the land.

[John Dibble]

Even with appointments, I imagine that the DMV would be like a doctor's office - you'd still have to wait longer than you should. Probably worse. The DMV is the most inefficient beauracracy in all the land.

hehehe . . . yes, but I must admit they have gotten better.  Here in VA, they now assign you a alpha-numeric code when you arrive.  The code indicates why you are there, and is fed into a queing system.  When the DMV personnel sign into their stations, it knows which lane they are in and what they are qualified to assist you with, so the computer will not send you to a station that you cannot be helped at.  Beats the old days of waiting in line and having a person say "oh, I'm sorry you waited an hour, but you need to stand in that line over there."   

Of course, I've been doing most of my DMV stuff electronically, so I by-pass the hassle all together.  hahaha

My DMV had tickets for each type of line with numbers on them, and you had to wait for your number to be called. Still vastly inefficient in terms of getting people in and out.

[John Dibble]

California Driver's Handbook is very clear on this:  Privelege.

You think I care what a government published book says?