The Nanny State Strikes Again

Fox News ^ | 12/26/03 | William A. Niskanen

[jimkress]

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who must have little else to do, has recently urged state governments to pass "primary" seat-belt laws, which allow police to stop and cite motorists solely for failing to wear a seat belt.

And the Bush administration has proposed a $400 million incentive to reward state governments that pass such laws.

[Orangedog]

And what does forensic science have to do with the limits on government power?

[Peach]

Didn't see your other post distinguishing between seatbelts and seatbelt laws.

#1: Your assertion that seatbelts MAY save lives and reduce medical costs flies in the face of all available medical and forensic science in over 2 decades.

#2: Your assertion that seatbelt LAWS do not save lives or reduce medical costs - laws don't save lives per se, as you are aware. However, if we did not have a law against murder, are you saying there wouldn't be more murders? People like me probably would not have started belting up unless there were LAWS that required me to do so or pay a fine.

[Peach]

You were saying that seatbelts did not save lives. I was telling you that forensic science, which tests vehicle accident results on lifelike dummies, has proven you wrong, for well over 2 decades.

[FairOpinion]

"Why not support a Republican alternative?" Which part of: "if you don't support Bush, who do you think you are going to get as next president, probably Dean..." are you having trouble comprehending?

[Sandy]

considering how many people drive without automobile insurance, seatbelts do reduce medical costs for ALL of us when there is an accident

Yup. Socialism and nanny government, two peas in a pod.

[JOHANNES801]

I would like to buy you a beer,best damn answer to a smart ass punk I heard in a long time.

[FairOpinion]

PING -- in case you feel like having a fruitless discussion with Dean supporters...

[Peach]

So what laws do you feel are legitimate for the government to pass?

I'm assuming you believe that auto insurance legislation is also akin to socialism.

[Orangedog]

I'm gracious enough to concede point #1. I always wear mine, but that should be my choice, not the reason for the government to get involved in my life.

But I will take issue with you on point #2. Comparing seatbelt laws and murder is a straw man argument. It is not a legitimate function of Constitutional government to fine people for not wearing a seat belt.

[cajun-jack]

and i would dang sure drink it too!!!!! salute to you my friend!!

[Peach]

And so for uninsured drivers who get into automobile accidents and suffer more serious medical injuries - who should pay for that?

[Byron_the_Aussie]

..which part of: "if you don't support Bush, who do you think you are going to get as next president, probably Dean..." are you having trouble comprehending?...

Neither part. I meant, a Republican alternative to Bush. That would be FR's best role, to air (not suppress) dissatisfaction with the kind of Administration that sends $400m bribes to the states on something as Big Government as this seatbelt thing.

[Orangedog]

The drivers who get into the accident in the first place.

[Malcolm]

No true conservative would vote for anything other than the GOP. The more you think about it, the more clear and unmistakable the logic becomes. You cannot sit out elections and/or vote for 3rd parties/independents, then let the Dems take the seat by default and say this advances conservatism. It is completely ludicrous to suggest that, much less actually do it. The ones that profess such ridiculous strategies are leaders of defeat, not victory. If you are too intolerant to vote GOP, you are too intolerant to vote for anybody. If you cannot attain perfection, is that the signal to throw in the towel? No, it most certainly is not.

You have to feel pity for those unfortunates who have no grasp of thankfulness, maturity, realism, or productive uses of the tools at hand. The only have tunnel vision, with their very own selves in the starring role of hero. They remind me of a 70s movie where James Brolin played this demented fruitcake, who hijacks a plane and lands in the Soviet Union, thinking he will be received as a hero. If anyone in here thinks electing Dems is the answer, you are grossly mistaken. If you can justify all of the above, despite the utter contradictions and counter-productiveness of it all, you may not know what the terms "principled" or "conservative" mean either. And for the LP crowd, what reason or logic would appeal to those ubergeeks? LOL, confusion to the enemy!!!

[JOHANNES801]

If I run into your car and dont have insurance,I am hurting a fellow citizen,therefore insurance laws protect the other guy.If I choose to drive without seat belts,its my head,ass life ,no body else.I am not the property of the state so its none of their buissiness.

[Sandy]

I'm assuming you believe that auto insurance legislation is also akin to socialism.

Don't know where you got that idea. You were talking about the cost of uninsured drivers.

[Servant of the 9]

The Air Traffic system in this country has deteriorated to an almost 3rd World level and Minetta can't find anything useful to do with his time.

SO9

[Peach]

And you are aware that many, if not most (I've forgotten the stats that are published each year) of those people who forgo automobile insurance generally do so for financial reasons and do not have medical insurance and CANNOT pay for the medical costs incurred in the auto accident.

Hospitals will not generally kick them out, and so pass the costs along to - guess who? All of us!

[Servant of the 9]

The Air Traffic system in this country has deteriorated to an almost 3rd World level and Minetta can't find anything useful to do with his time.

SO9

[Congressman Billybob]

Bill Niskanen, who is a friend of mine and someone I highly respect, has allowed his philosophies to lead him astray in this article. Here are the factual reasons why:

As I know from reading, and as a friend of mine who did his residency at the Shock Trauma Unit of Maryland Hospital is well aware, motorcyclists who do not wear helments, and auto drivers who do not wear seat belts, are at the highest risk of coming out of an accident alive but brain dead. And given the capacity of modern medicine to keep such "vegetables" alive for a long time, this is an expensive proposition.

Those who suffer such injuries in accidents are, in more than half of the cases, financially incapable of paying for the costs of that long-term, expensive treatment. So, who pays for those costs? It is the taxpayers who support the institutions who treat these patients.

If it were true that irresponsibility by drivers caused harm only to themselves, I would agree entirely with Bill's article. But when other people's irresponsibilities give them financial claim on my assets, and the assets of all other taxpayers, we then have a right to tell these drivers what they have to do, to PREVENT THEM FROM RAIDING OUR WALLETS.

Philosophies are good, as far as they go. But every now and then, stark reality should rear its ugly head. And on this issue, the practical concerns amount to upward of a million dollars or more, for each rider or motorist who winds up in futile intensive care for two years or more.

Therefore, Bill is wrong on this issue, for factual, not philosophical reasons.

Congressman Billybob

Click here to stick a thumb in the eye of CFR, "Hugh & Series, Critical & Pulled by JimRob."