Vanity Plates & Freedom of Expression? - Page 2

team_barlo · #11 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dabateman

But the term Redneck can be offensive as well. I'm not about to tell someone that they cannot self identify as redneck and thus I'm not going to tell them that they cannot get a personalized license plate that says Redneck. The people who are offended have no real right to be offended. They aren't being called such. They can stuff it. The plates aren't on their car. It would be different if they were forced to have it on their vehicle.

Damned thought police.

I agree. None of the examples I have seen yet warrant censorship. Overly sensitive types need to just calm down and return to the planet. I might not like a kkk or dyke or poofter plate, but I would be FAR more offended by the censorship thereof. Those are stupidly annoying/halfway funny terms (well minus the kkk,)--not hideous epithets. I know lots of gays that identify as either "queens" or "nelly queers." Get over yourselves folks--I've gotten over myself. So please don't chastize me on this one.

Idealogically Promiscuous · #12 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:31 PM

Frankly, no tax money should be wasted on these "hearings". The DMV issues license plates for identification and licensing purposes and they have every power to change a plate at will. To think you have some right to approach the DMV with a grievance about what your plate says or doesn't say is just more of this "I'm special" baby boomer mentality that has mutated in the next generation as a "I'm the only important thing in the world" mentality.

Get over it. If the DMV doesn't want Poofter on it's license plates then the DMV can say "No Poofter on license plate for you".

I don't see what the big deal is.

Idealogically Promiscuous · #13 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by team_barlo

I agree. None of the examples I have seen yet warrant censorship. Overly sensitive types need to just calm down and return to the planet. I might not like a kkk or dyke or poofter plate, but I would be FAR more offended by the censorship thereof. Those are stupidly annoying/halfway funny terms (well minus the kkk,)--not hideous epithets. I know lots of gays that identify as either "queens" or "nelly queers." Get over yourselves folks! Oh BTW--I've gotten over myself. So don't chastize me on this one.

I agree that the DMV has more pressing matters than running around protecting the sensibilities of morons who let their personal boredom become society's next headache.

And you are right...most gay guys wouldn't be offended over the word poofter. Hell, I am gay and the word faggot flies out of my mouth so fast that sometimes its alarming.

team_barlo · #14 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyflamingos

While I,personally, think that it is much ado about nothing, I still think someone should point out that, technically, the plates do not belong to the owner of the vehicle. They are, in fact, the property of the state that issues them. So the state is merely regulating what one is allowed to post on state property.

But I have paid for it twice over. Once with taxes and a second time with my registration fee.

Every state has it's laws, but so does the Federal Government--most notably the US Constitution. If a State chooses to not offer vanity plates then so be it. If they do offer them then are they entitled to restrict free speech in possible violation of the Constitution? I would say not.

cnredd · #15 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idealogically Promiscuous

And you are right...most gay guys wouldn't be offended over the word poofter. Hell, I am gay and the word faggot flies out of my mouth so fast that sometimes its alarming.

It not what flies out of your mouth I'm concerned about...

cnredd does the "That-was-just-wrong!" dance...

KnightOfSappho · #16 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by team_barlo

But I have paid for it twice over. Once with taxes and a second time with my registration fee.

Every state has it's laws, but so does the Federal Government--most notably the US Constitution. If a State chooses to not offer vanity plates then so be it. If they do offer them then are they entitled to restrict free speech in possible violation of the Constitution? I would say not.

I don't think that it is representing free speech as much as it is representing the state government by allowing the plate to exist under its name.

Truthfully, I think that the PC thing has gone too far, but I also recognize that the state government should have some say in how it is represented in situations like this. For obvious reasons, the gov't would not want a plate out there saying MASTERB8 or such.

crazyflamingos · #17 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by team_barlo

But I have paid for it twice over. Once with taxes and a second time with my registration fee.

Every state has it's laws, but so does the Federal Government--most notably the US Constitution. If a State chooses to not offer vanity plates then so be it. If they do offer them then are they entitled to restrict free speech in possible violation of the Constitution? I would say not.

I understand your point. But it is still technically state property.

How would you feel if someone wanted to post their naughty thoughts on the courthouse walls or the backs of traffic signs? After all, we pay for them too.

To me, this is one of those fights that is just not worth fighting. The issue is way too legally complicated as compared to its real significance.

cnredd · #18 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KnightOfSappho

IFor obvious reasons, the gov't would not want a plate out there saying MASTERB8 or such.

Thanks for the idea!...

KnightOfSappho · #19 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

Thanks for the idea!...

No matter what state you are in, I'm sure that it has been applied for and rejected!

Sorry.

foundit66 · #20 (**permalink**) 11-06-2007, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mytmouse57

What about a Black man with plates that translated to "Jungle Bunny" or "Spear Chucker."
A Native American with "Blanket Ass"
A Jew with "Kike"
A Middle Easterner with "Rag Head"
Or a White Guy with "Cracker."
Would those be too offensive and inflammatory, or should people be allowed to display such things on license plates?

Or, the next thought, on a bumper sticker located just a few inches away from the license plate???

Banning the plate does little to address the complained about "problem"...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mytmouse57

Personally, I think it's an interesting question. I'm not sure I've made up my mind yet, although I do tend to lean toward always supporting free expression.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/civil-rights/416-vanity-plates-freedom-expression.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Mortgage Rate Refinance - mortgage mortgage101 rate, rate mailto	This thread	Refback	11-15-2007 10:20 PM