if the roads were private, you would not be legally compelled by force to pay for the roads, and thus the use of the roads and your funding of the roads is entirely voluntary. If roads were private and they have a rule you don't like you don't have to use them OR PAY FOR THEM.
In the case of public roads, you don't have to use them, sure, but one way or another, you pay for them. And its bullshit.
Although I agree that people should be free to decide whether or not to protect themselves, seatbelt laws protect not only the driver in an accident, but other parties involved. For example, if I am at fault in a rear-end crash on someone wearing a seatbelt who walks away from the accident with only some minor injuries, I will have to pay much less through my insurance than if I had hit someone not wearing a seatbelt who became a quadriplegic.
@liamunderscoret However it could also be said that having potentially larger penalties for being at fault in an accident would discourage reckless driving.
The statistic is each and everyone of us are costing the "system" money in some way. If the sole objective is to save the system money, shouldn't we find what the most common wrong is? Wouldn't that save the most money? Sure. Why focus efforts on something that accounts for very little? It is like changing your light bulbs to CFL when you A/C costs you an extra $100 a month.
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
Too many people lack common sense, that's why these laws are popping up everywhere. Because they decide against buckling up and get splattered all over the road, as a taxpayer I have to pay for such idiotic behavior. So yes, we need these seatbelt laws, plain and simple. Why should you be allowed to not buckle up when you know your kids are going to watch everything you do - you are promoting negligent parenting by teaching them carelessness and that rights are more important than safety.
So you're saying that it is morally justified to tell others how to live their lives because others "know better" how they should? Why not follow this to its logical extension, health care? In such a world, fatty foods would be illegal because they increase the risk of heart disease. It's the same principle. What right does the government have to say how people should keep themselves safe? Furthermore, why should the government own the highways? These are legitimate questions.
These are stupid questions. The government has every right needed to care about people's safety. Government must involve to keep the order. This involves seatbelt, gun law and everything "unfree" else. The example with the arms in the third minute is ridiculous.
Instead of bulletproof vests, government does limit guns.
If you don't like regulations as seatbelts, red lights and so on, try driving in Africa. This is the price you have to pay to live in a developed country.
If you don't see where seatbelts are different from red lights, you fail to understand the difference between imposing order and infringing on individual rights. The crux of my argument is that the government has no business forcing an individual to keep themselves safe, not that it has no business keeping people safe from others. The individual issue is not really the point, but is rather an example to point out a larger concept.
I have to correct myself. I didn't actually mean that the government's place is to protect people from each other, but rather to compel people to maintain order. Criminal laws should have two purposes, and those are to deter people from infringing on others' rights, and when they fail to deter people from doing so they provide a means of holding them accountable for their actions. I cannot advocate a law which does not do both of these, ergo I cannot support the mandatory seatbelt law.
Though, it is criminal for oil tankers to release oil on the sea to flush the tanks, although nobody is harmed by that. Furthermore, as you can see, there are lots of youtube-videos that show that a person not fasting her seatbelt does a lot of harm to other passengers.
Your first example is false. Pollution is harmful to people and animals alike, and oil dumping is pollution. I can't speak to your second point, but I could argue that even if this is true, the passengers could make a point of telling the person to buckle up, or they could choose not to ride with them.
non-crude oil does not harm anybody on high seas, neither fish, nor coastal birds, and not even sea mammals. And how can your child that newer saw you with a seatbelt choose not to ride with you, or tell you to fasten it?
@MaxikingWolke22 Studies have reported that injuries have not gone down in relation to seatbelt use. The numbers may have transferred from seat belt wearers to other victims in a crash like pedestrians. Reports have shown that seatbelt use causes more accidents because drivers feel less vulnerable to injury therefore drive more recklessly.
@js68fl Sounds like a snobbery speech to make yourself feel superior to others. There is always somebody who knows better in some area. If we all earned our right to punish for not following our chosen preferences, we would a very crappy society. There is always someone who exercises, eats, and behaves (sexually, and publicly) in a statistically(depending on the desired outcome) superior fashion.
Would you prefer that someone come into your life to find all your weaknesses and punish you?
@Polarcupcheck "Would you prefer that someone come into your life to find all your weaknesses and punish you?"
The point is, if you aren't smart enough to buckle up on the road for your safety and everyone else inside the vehicle, you don't deserve to drive or have a license for that matter. Driving is a privilege and not a right.
@js68fl Like I said, lets get together, find your not so perfect behavior, and start droppping $100 dollar fines for every burger you eat, or one dollar for every minute of exercise under the ideal everyday. Everytime you forget to wash your hands, or perhaps, not to our standards, we'll impose more fines.
The point is, you are giving a snobbery speech just to make yourself feel better, rather than using logic.
@Polarcupcheck If more self-righteous idiots like you did a little statistical research you would know that it isn't just about revenue. But that's okay, continue acting as if you know everything, and leave the statistical data to those who see it everyday and understand it.
Does the Government pay for my car insurance NO does the Government pay for my health insurance NO, so Y make me wear my seatbelt. What I am a Fucking child a 7 year old, who R the Police my parents. Who am I hurting by not wearing my seat belt myself? If any thing I'm going to drive safer not wearing my seatbelt. Police always say seat belts save lifes, well according to that logic and mentallity so do bullet proof vests, now what your going to make a law forcing people to wear them Whats next
Well, I wouldn't advocate not wearing seat belts, but the point is that it's not my place (or the government's) to force you to wear one. Your sentiments are pretty much in line with the position I advocate.
Anyhow, like I said, I have mixed emotions, but I think because I was personally affected by someones irresponsibility, I am glad she got nailed and had to spend time in jail and pay fines and pay restitution to me. Maybe she will learn a lesson. But, I also agree that people have the right to govern themselves and should be free. This is a tough one for me.
Now, you see, the line was drawn when her irresponsible behavior caused her to damage your property. She should have been watching, but she wasn't. The law can't compel her to pay attention, but it can hold her accountable for the damages caused as a result. Laws don't prevent stupidity or crime, they can only punish those who do wrong. Making stupidity criminal makes us all criminals, frankly.
People still have the choice, the choice isn't taken away. But, I think the laws are supposed to be a guideline for others that would act irresponsibly and don't think of how their actions affect others, after all we do live in a society.
Another interesting topic. I was rear ended by a lady that was screaming at and trying to reach back to her kids while they were bouncing around in the back seat. I saw the situation unfold in my rear view mirror and there was nothing to I could do to prevent it. So her poor decision and irresponsibility affected me, not just herself.
Cops don't know if you are breaking the law because many people don't have to wear them. I am exempt from the law because of a disability.
brianjc2002 4 months ago
if the roads were private, you would not be legally compelled by force to pay for the roads, and thus the use of the roads and your funding of the roads is entirely voluntary. If roads were private and they have a rule you don't like you don't have to use them OR PAY FOR THEM.
In the case of public roads, you don't have to use them, sure, but one way or another, you pay for them. And its bullshit.
Capitalism wins every time.
bobdole57 9 months ago
Although I agree that people should be free to decide whether or not to protect themselves, seatbelt laws protect not only the driver in an accident, but other parties involved. For example, if I am at fault in a rear-end crash on someone wearing a seatbelt who walks away from the accident with only some minor injuries, I will have to pay much less through my insurance than if I had hit someone not wearing a seatbelt who became a quadriplegic.
liamunderscoret 10 months ago
@liamunderscoret However it could also be said that having potentially larger penalties for being at fault in an accident would discourage reckless driving.
liamunderscoret 10 months ago
The statistic is each and everyone of us are costing the "system" money in some way. If the sole objective is to save the system money, shouldn't we find what the most common wrong is? Wouldn't that save the most money? Sure. Why focus efforts on something that accounts for very little? It is like changing your light bulbs to CFL when you A/C costs you an extra $100 a month.
Polarcupcheck 1 year ago
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
djsuess2007 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
djsuess2007 1 year ago
100% AGREED THEY ARE SLOWLY TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AND OUR ABILITIES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON OUR OWN. WE LEARN FORM ACCIDENTS, THAT IS THE HUMAN WAY
djsuess2007 1 year ago
I completely agree about this ridiculous seat belt law. If there is something that can be done about it, I wish I knew what it was.
MrWatt619 1 year ago
Too many people lack common sense, that's why these laws are popping up everywhere. Because they decide against buckling up and get splattered all over the road, as a taxpayer I have to pay for such idiotic behavior. So yes, we need these seatbelt laws, plain and simple. Why should you be allowed to not buckle up when you know your kids are going to watch everything you do - you are promoting negligent parenting by teaching them carelessness and that rights are more important than safety.
js68fl 2 years ago
So you're saying that it is morally justified to tell others how to live their lives because others "know better" how they should? Why not follow this to its logical extension, health care? In such a world, fatty foods would be illegal because they increase the risk of heart disease. It's the same principle. What right does the government have to say how people should keep themselves safe? Furthermore, why should the government own the highways? These are legitimate questions.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
@AtheistUndergrad
These are stupid questions. The government has every right needed to care about people's safety. Government must involve to keep the order. This involves seatbelt, gun law and everything "unfree" else. The example with the arms in the third minute is ridiculous.
Instead of bulletproof vests, government does limit guns.
If you don't like regulations as seatbelts, red lights and so on, try driving in Africa. This is the price you have to pay to live in a developed country.
MaxikingWolke22 2 years ago
If you don't see where seatbelts are different from red lights, you fail to understand the difference between imposing order and infringing on individual rights. The crux of my argument is that the government has no business forcing an individual to keep themselves safe, not that it has no business keeping people safe from others. The individual issue is not really the point, but is rather an example to point out a larger concept.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
I have to correct myself. I didn't actually mean that the government's place is to protect people from each other, but rather to compel people to maintain order. Criminal laws should have two purposes, and those are to deter people from infringing on others' rights, and when they fail to deter people from doing so they provide a means of holding them accountable for their actions. I cannot advocate a law which does not do both of these, ergo I cannot support the mandatory seatbelt law.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
Though, it is criminal for oil tankers to release oil on the sea to flush the tanks, although nobody is harmed by that. Furthermore, as you can see, there are lots of youtube-videos that show that a person not fasting her seatbelt does a lot of harm to other passengers.
MaxikingWolke22 2 years ago
Your first example is false. Pollution is harmful to people and animals alike, and oil dumping is pollution. I can't speak to your second point, but I could argue that even if this is true, the passengers could make a point of telling the person to buckle up, or they could choose not to ride with them.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
non-crude oil does not harm anybody on high seas, neither fish, nor coastal birds, and not even sea mammals. And how can your child that newer saw you with a seatbelt choose not to ride with you, or tell you to fasten it?
MaxikingWolke22 2 years ago
@MaxikingWolke22 Studies have reported that injuries have not gone down in relation to seatbelt use. The numbers may have transferred from seat belt wearers to other victims in a crash like pedestrians. Reports have shown that seatbelt use causes more accidents because drivers feel less vulnerable to injury therefore drive more recklessly.
getcreamed 1 year ago
@js68fl Sounds like a snobbery speech to make yourself feel superior to others. There is always somebody who knows better in some area. If we all earned our right to punish for not following our chosen preferences, we would a very crappy society. There is always someone who exercises, eats, and behaves (sexually, and publicly) in a statistically(depending on the desired outcome) superior fashion.
Would you prefer that someone come into your life to find all your weaknesses and punish you?
Polarcupcheck 1 year ago
@Polarcupcheck "Would you prefer that someone come into your life to find all your weaknesses and punish you?"
The point is, if you aren't smart enough to buckle up on the road for your safety and everyone else inside the vehicle, you don't deserve to drive or have a license for that matter. Driving is a privilege and not a right.
js68fl 1 year ago
@js68fl Like I said, lets get together, find your not so perfect behavior, and start droppping $100 dollar fines for every burger you eat, or one dollar for every minute of exercise under the ideal everyday. Everytime you forget to wash your hands, or perhaps, not to our standards, we'll impose more fines.
The point is, you are giving a snobbery speech just to make yourself feel better, rather than using logic.
Polarcupcheck 1 year ago
@Polarcupcheck If more self-righteous idiots like you did a little statistical research you would know that it isn't just about revenue. But that's okay, continue acting as if you know everything, and leave the statistical data to those who see it everyday and understand it.
js68fl 1 year ago
@js68fl I love statistics, and I'm sure we could find some that you are not on the perfect side of and pile up the fines.
Polarcupcheck 1 year ago
@Polarcupcheck So far your "love" of statistics has yet to appear here anywhere to prove anything to support your anti-seatbelt crusade.
js68fl 1 year ago
@js68fl Lets outlaw motorcycles because according to you they will get splattered on the road, AND YES THEY DO.
cwood4ever 11 months ago
Too bad Minnesotans did not fight back on this stupid law. New Hampshire is the only free state left.
Randythewildhorse 2 years ago
You sir are right on point. Sucks that you're an atheist though. But your views on liberty are the same as mine.
PwnStarr 2 years ago
Nothing like forcing grown ups to protect themselfs!
CookCountyConnecter 2 years ago
Exactly.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
@CookCountyConnecter
Nothing like forcing grown ups to learn how to spell (themselfs=themselves).
mpfan2112 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Does the Government pay for my car insurance NO does the Government pay for my health insurance NO, so Y make me wear my seatbelt. What I am a Fucking child a 7 year old, who R the Police my parents. Who am I hurting by not wearing my seat belt myself? If any thing I'm going to drive safer not wearing my seatbelt. Police always say seat belts save lifes, well according to that logic and mentallity so do bullet proof vests, now what your going to make a law forcing people to wear them Whats next
CookCountyConnecter 2 years ago
Well, I wouldn't advocate not wearing seat belts, but the point is that it's not my place (or the government's) to force you to wear one. Your sentiments are pretty much in line with the position I advocate.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
Anyhow, like I said, I have mixed emotions, but I think because I was personally affected by someones irresponsibility, I am glad she got nailed and had to spend time in jail and pay fines and pay restitution to me. Maybe she will learn a lesson. But, I also agree that people have the right to govern themselves and should be free. This is a tough one for me.
nyelton22 2 years ago
Now, you see, the line was drawn when her irresponsible behavior caused her to damage your property. She should have been watching, but she wasn't. The law can't compel her to pay attention, but it can hold her accountable for the damages caused as a result. Laws don't prevent stupidity or crime, they can only punish those who do wrong. Making stupidity criminal makes us all criminals, frankly.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago
People still have the choice, the choice isn't taken away. But, I think the laws are supposed to be a guideline for others that would act irresponsibly and don't think of how their actions affect others, after all we do live in a society.
nyelton22 2 years ago
Another interesting topic. I was rear ended by a lady that was screaming at and trying to reach back to her kids while they were bouncing around in the back seat. I saw the situation unfold in my rear view mirror and there was nothing to I could do to prevent it. So her poor decision and irresponsibility affected me, not just herself.
nyelton22 2 years ago
When you enact laws to protect fools from their own folly, you only succeed in filling the world with fools.
Best,
Bill
PipeDreamsInc 2 years ago
Thanks for posting, and well put.
AtheistUndergrad 2 years ago