Replies

"This may not be the best example, as most people agree with the restraints as a public safety issue"

I agree, it's not a good example. I was an adult at the time and remember it well when you didn't have to have seat belts. Driving is a privilege not a right and when you are belted in, not only yourself and passengers are better able to survive a crash but you are better able to control a car if you are belted in.

A better example is that when I was growing up, each state set it's laws in regards to the age of being able to purchase and consume alcohol. Throughout the 80's the Federal Government wanted all states to conform to the drinking age to be 21. They did this by threatening to hold Federal Highway funds to states unless they conformed. They all did. Where in the Constitution did the states give the Federal government the authority to set drinking age policy among the states? It's been a slippery slope that the Federal government has gone down to get more power for itself and take that power away from the states.

But you’ll find that the longer the drinking age has been at 21 years, the more most people agree with it.

It doesn’t matter if it’s safety restraints, drinking age, national sovereignty, or socialist programs, a key component to boiling the frog is social/cultural acclimation. People agree with the warmer water after it’s been set.

The question is, are we going towards a better place?

Are we going toward some more civilized utopia where everyone is unable to be threats to themselves, liberated to attain a state of perpetual lack of need, or some sort of cross between Wall-E and the Matrix where your worth is determined by a higher power and you’re protected based only upon that.

Ultimately the seat belt laws like the drinking age laws were legislation lobbied by insurance companies to protect their interests and profits.

The government-corporate-industrial complex is the epitome of fascism.

Look at healthcare as a great example.