Why do you believe someone else has more standing than you do in deciding what side of the road you drive on? Why would you let someone else, at the point of a gun, tell you which streetlights you must stop or drive through?
The roads are a shared resource. I own them as much as anyone. We establish a political process for determining just what the rules will be for this shared resource.
My body, on the other hand, is not public property. I should be able to decide what the rules are for my own body. Not you.
>>Why would you let someone else, at the point of a gun, tell you which streetlights you must stop or drive through?<<
I don't. I live in Washington state, where there is no rule of law since the last election. I stop at red lights when it would be dangerous to go through, or when there are cops around. Otherwise...so far, so good.
I treat ALL red lights as "flashing red", unless there is a cop around. It is all a game. If I get a ticket it is like landing on someone elses property in a game of monopoly. I just want to avoid Boardwalk with a hotel! ;)
Because the obvious safety of others is preserved by a simple, non-invasive agreement on convention. It does not lead to wrong-address, no-knock armed invasions buy jack-booted LEO thugs and a general savaging of the bill of rights costing me 50 billion and still counting and over-flowing prisons which breed gang violence the pours back onto the streets with no measurable advantage or benefit flowing to the tax-payers.
The difference between my question and your unworkable analogy should be obvious. Isn't it?