Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Click it or ticket
townhall ^ | 5/24/06 | Walter WIlliams

Posted on 05/31/2006 9:42:50 AM PDT by from occupied ga

Virginia's secretary of transportation sent out a letter announcing the state's annual "Click It or Ticket" campaign May 22 through June 4. I responded to the secretary of transportation with my own letter that in part reads:

"Mr. Secretary: This is an example of the disgusting abuse of state power. Each of us owns himself, and it follows that we should have the liberty to take risks with our own lives but not that of others. That means it's a legitimate use of state power to mandate that cars have working brakes because if my car has poorly functioning brakes, I risk the lives of others and I have no right to do so. If I don't wear a seatbelt I risk my own life, which is well within my rights. As to your statement 'Lack of safety belt use is a growing public health issue that . . . also costs us all billions of dollars every year,' that's not a problem of liberty. It's a problem of socialism. No human should be coerced by the state to bear the medical expense, or any other expense, for his fellow man. In other words, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another is morally offensive."

My letter went on to tell the secretary that I personally wear a seatbelt each time I drive; it's a good idea. However, because something is a good idea doesn't necessarily make a case for state compulsion. The justifications used for "Click It or Ticket" easily provide the template and soften us up for other forms of government control over our lives.

For example, my weekly exercise routine consists of three days' weight training and three days' aerobic training. I think it's a good idea. Like seatbelt use, regular exercise extends lives and reduces health care costs. Here's my question to government officials and others who sanction the "Click It or Ticket" campaign: Should the government mandate daily exercise for the same reasons they cite to support mandatory seatbelt use, namely, that to do so would save lives and save billions of health care dollars?

If we accept the notion that government ought to protect us from ourselves, we're on a steep slippery slope. Obesity is a major contributor to hypertension, coronary disease and diabetes, and leads not only to many premature deaths but billions of dollars in health care costs. Should government enforce, depending on a person's height, sex and age, a daily 1,400 to 2,000-calorie intake limit? There's absolutely no dietary reason to add salt to our meals. High salt consumption can lead to high blood pressure, which can then lead to stroke, heart attack, osteoporosis and asthma. Should government outlaw adding salt to meals? While you might think that these government mandates would never happen, be advised that there are busybody groups currently pushing for government mandates on how much and what we can eat.

Government officials, if given power to control us, soon become zealots. Last year, Maryland state troopers were equipped with night vision goggles, similar to those used by our servicemen in Iraq, to catch night riders not wearing seatbelts. Maryland state troopers boasted that they bagged 44 drivers traveling unbuckled under the cover of darkness.

Philosopher John Stuart Mill, in his treatise "On Liberty," said it best:  "That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil, in case he do otherwise."

Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, VA as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: 4a; 4thamendment; clickitorticket; donutwatch; fourthamendment; governmentabuse; govwatch; libertarians; mdm; policeabuse; seatbelt; seatbelts; walterwilliams
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 661-670 next last
To: from occupied ga

you sound like such a libertarian..."its capitalism, stupid"


41 posted on 05/31/2006 10:06:49 AM PDT by chrispycsuf (our troops need our support now more than ever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
So have your insurance rates gone down with all the seat belt legislation? After all, we're all safer now, right?

When I started driving, a significant number of vehicles on the highway did not have seat belts. The dashboards were made of steel, no padding, no airbags, no crumple zones, bias ply tires, no antilock brakes, no traction control computers, some didn't even have collapsing steering columns.

If you did not get into a wreck, you did just fine.

All those gee-gaws are really nice, but they are no substitute for paying attention, and not driving like a bloody idiot.

42 posted on 05/31/2006 10:06:49 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.

wow, that's a pretty socialist statement. i paid for my car, i own it, i have a right to use it. try inserting the word "shoot" (as in, shoot a gun) for drive and tell me where you stand. that's the equivalent. it's like saying, "you have a right to own a gun, but not shoot it."
43 posted on 05/31/2006 10:06:49 AM PDT by absolootezer0 ("My God, why have you forsaken us.. no wait, its the liberals that have forsaken you... my bad")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chrispycsuf

"i think this is a great campaign...it keeps my car insurance down because my premiums go up every time a stupid person decides to drive down the road with out a seatbelt and hit another car and die. this has been around for about a year now in california and it has worked well. i have yet to get a ticket because im not stupid enough to drive without a seatbelt...its equivalent to bungee jumping without a cord...common sense people."

Most Communist Socialists do think it's a good idea.

Speaking of common sense, there's a book I recommend you read. It's called "Uncommon Sense" Probably written by a person you would loath.

His name was Thomas Paine.


44 posted on 05/31/2006 10:07:19 AM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (In a world where Carpenters come back from the dead, ALL things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

It's always about the money. Here in Nashville, our mayor openly admitted that he wants a 33% increase in revenues from traffic violations. And he's got the police chief, who's a political hack and a sap anyway, sending his cops out there to collect. I wonder if they even bother writing tickets to the illegals they stop? I mean, if they don't pay the fine, they're not going to bother to arrest them anyway since it's too much trouble and won't bring in any money. I don't know that "traffic anarchy" is the result of this kind of thing, but trying to pretend that I have "respect for the law" gets tougher by the minute.


45 posted on 05/31/2006 10:07:23 AM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.

So...where do YOU draw the line? When they tell you what kind of car you HAVE to drive? That you can only drive from point A to point B? That only a certain class of people can drive?

What is is, mr lemming?

46 posted on 05/31/2006 10:07:31 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.

Privilege my a$$! You're a sheeple and you're full of it.

47 posted on 05/31/2006 10:07:40 AM PDT by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: old gringo

These seatbelt nazis are the types of people that think big government is always good for us.


48 posted on 05/31/2006 10:07:59 AM PDT by Luke21 (Democrats hate us, our heritage, and our religion. They think we belong in cages. Never forget.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

Nope the Second Amendment is pretty clear on guns, not so for cars, or horse-drawn carriages, if you want to go back that far.


49 posted on 05/31/2006 10:08:02 AM PDT by dfwgator (Florida Gators - 2006 NCAA Men's Basketball Champions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: seamusnh

TWICE! Two times, the voters in Mass. shot down seatbelt laws, byt the legislature pushed them through anyway.


50 posted on 05/31/2006 10:08:06 AM PDT by Toby06 (True conservatives vote based on their values, not for parties.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: calljack
LAPD officers were on foot patrol around the park and came up and told me I had 20 minutes to get my propane BBQ off of the property as propane BBQ's are now illegal to have in the park.

Yep just doing their duty - enforcing the law. In (maryland I think) I heard that they've banned charcoal grills for the same reason, but not propane grills (yet). Don't you feel all safe now knowing that the police are vigilantly protecting you from propane grills?

51 posted on 05/31/2006 10:08:48 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: chrispycsuf

"The dept of transportation is saving lives and i applaud them for it."

They are a nanny state and I DON'T applaud them for it. No matter. You are obviously a woman. Women value "security" over individual freedom while men tend to reverse the priorities.

Preserving life at all costs is not the ultimate goal, otherwise men would not have fought and died for the liberties you enjoy, but are being etched away in the name of "safety". By all means, tell people belts are safer. Show them statistics. Plead with them to put their cars in carseats. Just don't make it the law!


52 posted on 05/31/2006 10:09:05 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: canuck_conservative

"Each of us owns himself, and it follows that we should have the liberty to take risks with our own lives but not that of others."

That's a good pro-drug-use argument.



It's no more pro-drug than Williams' article is anti-seatbelt ("I personally wear a seatbelt each time I drive; it's a good idea.")

But there are lots of similar arguments against the "War on Drugs", which arguably has costs (police state, neglect of public safety enforcement) that exceed its dubious benefits (and which I will not engage in off-topic debate on this thread, so please don't try.)


53 posted on 05/31/2006 10:09:40 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.

That statement is more appropriate to an absolute monarchy or a Communist dictatorship than to our form of government, at least in theory. Under monarchism or Communism, the sovereign or the state owns everything and anything you do is by the permission of that authority. It is impractical for a road system to be owned by anyone other than a state agency, although some libertarians believe that roads could be privatized.

If the state must own the roads in a free society, what regulations are posted on the roads should be the minimum necessary to maintain order. Too often government, motivated by nanny state ideology or unduly influenced by insurance company and other lobbyists, have used their power over the roads to impose oppressive controls. The notorious 55 MPH speed limit of the 1970s and 1980s (which Hillary Clinton has proposed to revive) was the most egregious of these controls.

A sound adage in these matters comes from an old Hank Williams, Sr., song, "If you mind your business, then you won't be mindin' mine."

54 posted on 05/31/2006 10:10:01 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege

That tired old line is pure BS. If my taxes construct the roads, I sure as hell have a right to use them to go place to place.

55 posted on 05/31/2006 10:10:23 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Sounds like socialist drivel.

Where do we get this notion that driving is a privilege ?Privileges are subject to an arbitrary whim of some moron who has authority.

How did we as a country fall down so much that we need to have government special permission to transport ourselves with a motor vehicle ? We never needed a license to ride a horse or drive/ride a stagecoach. We didn't have to get government permission to ride a horse.

It seems we are going in the direction where the laws specify that you can do anything unless there is a specific law against the act. Under socialism, you cannot do anything unless permission is granted and that is the direction we are heading towards.

You do not have the right to drive, it is a privilege, and to keep that privilege there are rules to follow.
56 posted on 05/31/2006 10:11:19 AM PDT by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Wow, looking with amazement at some of these responses... Who knew that for so many on FR nanny statism was celebrated and Liberty was such a dirty word... May there be a zero-tolerance 55 mph speed limit with gps tracking, active government monitoring, and $1000 fines in your future...


57 posted on 05/31/2006 10:11:41 AM PDT by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
krackow picture

Ah yes, the originals, who redated the seat-belt kind.

58 posted on 05/31/2006 10:12:47 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
Who gave you the right to raise insurance rates both for automobile drivers and for healthcare costs? When you crush your body in a mangled mess, do you honestly think it doesn't affect everyone else? I wish that weren't the case and that drivers were totally responsible for their own stupidity, but that's not reality.

i pay my own insurance on health care, auto and life. in my life, i have already paid enough to cover pretty much anything that might happen to me in a car wreck. when we get onto complete socialised insurance for everything, then your arguement will be valid.
59 posted on 05/31/2006 10:12:49 AM PDT by absolootezer0 ("My God, why have you forsaken us.. no wait, its the liberals that have forsaken you... my bad")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

so is it alright to smoke medical marijuana, crack cocaine, crystal meth...it doesnt harm others if i do it in my home....the socialist government is keeping me down (sarcasm)...im being brought down by "the man"


60 posted on 05/31/2006 10:13:39 AM PDT by chrispycsuf (our troops need our support now more than ever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 661-670 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson