I appreciate that there is a small requirement for proficiency for the privilege of motorbiking and driving.
OK, I know that this may be starting yet another political rant, but it just gets my hackles up every time I hear somebody say this. Then again maybe it's just semantics. Maybe it's just the word "privilege" that sets me off, but to my mind, driving is NOT a privilege.
Number one: our government is (supposedly) not in the business of granting privileges to its citizens. Our government is supposed to be a guarantor of our rights and protector of our liberty. Our founding documents make it very clear that we have natural rights and liberties. Our rights are
natural, or if you prefer, God-given, but they do NOT come from the government. The government protects our rights and liberties, it doesn't grant them. It can regulate, and in some instances, limit our rights and liberties when necessary to protect others, but in no case is the government the source of rights, liberties, or
privileges.
Secondly, I have a problem with the whole idea of government taking OUR money through taxation, using OUR money to build and maintain roads on OUR (public) property, and then treating those roads as private property and doling out the "privilege" of using them.
To illustrate what I mean, let's try taking it to a more personal level. Suppose your house was half a mile from any road. For the sake of argument, we'll ignore the fact that you could drive to the nearest road without some formal "road", or that you could just build your own. We'll also ignore the fact that in the real world the government couldn't care less if you have a house without a road going to it. So..., the government comes in, takes YOUR money and builds a road on YOUR property that links your house to the nearest existing road. How would you feel if they then told you that you weren't allowed to use that road? How would you feel if they told you that you had to petition them for the
privilege of using the road that was built on
your land using
your money? The principle doesn't change just because there are more people and more money involved; they are still using our money to build and maintain roads on our property and then telling us that it's a privilege to use them. I don't buy it.
I will agree, however, that the government can and should require some kind of demonstration of driving ability before allowing someone to drive on the public roads. But that's a limitation of liberty, not the granting of a privilege. It's a case of limiting individual liberty in the interest of public safety. I believe that users of public roads have a vested interest in assuring that other users actually know how to drive. I consider that protecting my life and property - a legitimate function of government.
There are limitations on who can drive on public roads and limits what they can drive and how they can drive. But just because there are limitations doesn't mean that driving is a privilege.