Can you cite one of these laws that involved the safety of the individual and not the safety of others? Speed, drunkeness etc, all concern the individuals threat to others. A helmet concerns the individuals risk to himself. There is a vast difference between the two.
That's for the safety of others.
DRIVING ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ROAD is an invitation to a fight ~ mano y mano ~ sword tip to sword tip.
Why don't you fight convention and just drive on the left for awhile.
Dear Melas,
Actually, those laws have existed too. Part of the public drunkness laws while driving horse carriages were to protect the drunk!!!
In summary though, I DO get the libertarian argument about this being “my body and I can do with it what I want” (with some reservations needless to say.. like the crappy abortion argument)
However, when someone dies/gets injured on a public road, then the “public” is picking up liability on him/her in terms of insurance and health care
In addition a very valid point is that if you have an accident with me and you die, I am now in a vehicular homicide investigation. So for MY safety it is necessary for you to be safe
Shared resources (like public roads) result in giving up of some personal rights. A famous example is the “free speech” example of yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre. Not allowed.
Also, even your personal body has some limits. The courts and our founders have held that suicide is illegal. Now, of course it is permitted, but for many centuries it was illegal.
To me, driving a motorcycle without a helmet is akin to suicide.
Anyhoo, good chat and good thread!
Cheers!