“Now YOU are being "extreme".
Nonsense. The truth of my statement, "It is very rare that an act of lethal stupidity affects only the actor," is easily demonstrated.
“This is a typical liberal view, such as everyone must be forced to wear seat belts because it'll drive up everyone's insurance costs. And/or because if the man dies (allegedly from no seat belt), he has affected his poor children.”
If you’re going to jump into the middle of a thread, would you at least have the courtesy to read what has gone before? This has already been dealt with, and forcing people to repeat themselves is just rude.
“Absurd. EVERYTHING affects everything else”
No, it doesn’t.
“So if it was truly applied, NOTHING would be legal”
Another misapplication of reductio ad absurdum. It is not valid to argue, “It would be terrible if we all acted irrationally, so we must not act at all.”
No, YOU ARE being absurd. Your own statement....
"It is very rare that an act of lethal stupidity affects only the actor"
....backs up EXACTLY what I said!
"EVERYTHING affects everything else"
Then you say "no it doesn't". BS. Technically, every single thing I do affects something else. Your kind of thinking however, threatens to elevate the importance of these intangible domino effects.
I will state the seat-belt thing again. Sorry for not having QUITE enough time to read ALL of what you and everyone else wrote. Deal with it. It's common on forums.
Nanny-staters who worry so much about "safety" posit the idea that insurance costs will go up if not, as a reason to force people to wear seat belts. I.e., you 200 miles from me not wearing your seat belt has a trickle-down effect of costing me money down the road.
Such reasoning is twistedly absurd.