Many of the examples make this article hard to take seriously. For example:
> Your landlord is telling you what colors can be used for paint inside your apartment (if you live in a rent-controlled apartment): You should be able to do what you want with your property.
If you have a landlord, it is by definition NOT your property. Also, what difference does it make if its rent-controlled or not?
> Being required to get an ID card when getting on an airplane: People shouldn’t treat innocent individuals like criminals simply because they want peace of mind.
"Being required to get an ID" does not equal "being treated like a criminal."
I also would have expected to see some mention of civil asset forfeiture.
Poor wording doesn't mean it's now fair being unable to make alterations to the area you call home. So you sign a 1-2 year lease and you're not allowed to slap on a coat of paint, you think that's fair?
Also, and again, your nit picking doesn't refute the point about requiring I.D to fly on a plane. It's an unneccessary burden to put on law abiding citizens/taxpayers, and I'm sure most rational people would agree.
2 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 13.5 ms ] thread> Your landlord is telling you what colors can be used for paint inside your apartment (if you live in a rent-controlled apartment): You should be able to do what you want with your property.
If you have a landlord, it is by definition NOT your property. Also, what difference does it make if its rent-controlled or not?
> Being required to get an ID card when getting on an airplane: People shouldn’t treat innocent individuals like criminals simply because they want peace of mind.
"Being required to get an ID" does not equal "being treated like a criminal."
I also would have expected to see some mention of civil asset forfeiture.
Also, and again, your nit picking doesn't refute the point about requiring I.D to fly on a plane. It's an unneccessary burden to put on law abiding citizens/taxpayers, and I'm sure most rational people would agree.