Seat Belt Laws Save Lives, Kill Liberties

boblonsberry.com ^ | 1/27/03 | Bob Lonsberry

[BSunday]

Why the heck didn't I need a dang bicycle helmet when I was a kid, yet my parents never got accused of child neglect for not making me wear them?? The amount of laws is ridiculous. It's all about the government taking away our parental rights and stepping in to parent our children for us

[Notwithstanding]

I don't want to pay cash (taking care of the family, paying for medical care and extensive physical therapy, etc.) for someone else's stupidity in not wearing a seatbelt - and

because you want to drive on the highway the community has funded, you have to play by the community rules.

Build a private road and drive like a jackass all you want.

[Puppage]

Stupid law. It's just another way for the police to "introduce" themselves to you...oh, and generate some revenue at the same time. Of course, wearing one will increase your chances of survival, but so will keeping your shoe laces tied while walking down the stairs. Do we NEED a law for that, too?

[Marie]

WONDEFUL post! *PING!*

[Wolfie]

It's the American Way.

[NYDave]

I have a home in the Dominican Republic and they just recently instituted seat belt laws for drivers. They're not heavily enforced as they don't have the personnel. They also outlawed drivers using cell phones. The irony is, you can drink and drive. As long as I have my seat belt on and am not talking on the phone, I can chug away and the cop on the corner won't even bat an eye.

[Notwithstanding]

In your world, we would need to have higher insurance rates for people who like the freedom of not wearing a seatbelt and who thus have bigger payouts when an accident does occur.
The rest of us should not have to pay for your freedom to live dangerously .

[Doc Savage]

Driving a car is a privilege afforded you by the state, not a God-given right. If it was we'd have every mentally ill moron tailgating us at 80mph. (Hey wait, we have that now!)

But the point is they can require you to wear a seat belt if in our representational form of government our elected officials have passed a law so stating. Geesh! Libertarians get so bent-out-of-shape over such silly laws. Just buckle up and try to have a nice day.

[sheik yerbouty]

If you don't wear one you're a damn fool. Nevertheless, in a free country one has the right to be a damn fool. It should not be the governments business.

[sheik yerbouty]

Gray Davis' Caliban will soon pass one!

[Carry_Okie]

The real problem is that we haven't allowed insurance companies to discriminate in their pricing. In a just society, if you want to drive without seatbelts, bareback in a bath-house, or go bungee jumping, you can PAY for the risk that the activity will result in injury. As it is, the State forces the insurers not to discriminate so all those people pay the same medical insurance rates. We have thus politically removed one of insurance's primary roles in a free market: motivating the adoption of low risk behavior while fairly allocating capital to deal with a problem should high risk behavior lead to mishap.

When we socialize medicine so that the taxpayer picks up the tab if the insurer won't pay, the public has a claim on regulating risky behavior. We have thus ceded the freedom to do as we please becuause it is no longer possible to account for risk.

[wjcsux]

Laws that outlaw stupidity hurt us all. Not wearing seatbelts in cars, or riding any two wheeled vehicle w/o a helmit is stupid. The government has no business legislating common sense.

[tnlibertarian]

The problem you have is with the socialist health care and welfare programs; not the seatbelt law. If someone wants to endanger their own lives, it is none of your business. By using these arguments, you open the door for the government to control all aspects of our lives in the name of "our own good". If a person is not free to make dumb decisions, they are not free. In Tennessee, they have started a program called "Click It or Ticket", it may be national, I'm not sure. I am also not sure if they are referring to our seat belts or our heels.

[freeeee]

I don't want to pay cash (taking care of the family, paying for medical care and extensive physical therapy, etc.) for someone else's stupidity in not wearing a seatbelt

That problem is entirely due to socialistic health care, and has nothing to do with seatbelt use.

And yet, you defend the seatbelt law while not attacking the underlying socialism that causes costs to be shifted to you.

Curious, and telling.

We all know that with freedom comes responsiblility. The idea behind socialism is that once you are not responsible for your own actions, others are. And those others are going to take your freedom in exchange.

And you bought their scam, hook like and sinker.

[The FRugitive]

I'm sorry, you seem to have gotten lost.

[AUgrad]

Because freedom is better than safety. Liberty more important than life, and self-reliance of greater worth than governmental paternalism.

Amen.

[OXENinFLA]

I never figured out why in FL you can ride a motorcycle and NOT wear a helmet, but you have to wear a seat belt in the car or you get a ticket. HUH?

[Agamemnon]

...community has funded, you have to play by the community rules....

Interesting choice of words. Ever notice how the word "community" forms the core of the word "communism?"

Be your own wet nurse if you like; I think I'll pass. Realize at the same time your loss of freedom allows your benevolent auto insurance company to beat the odds (debateably) and still charge confiscatory rates.

[Chemist_Geek]

And, in spite of what the state legislatures have done, the answer to the second question, in America, is clear. The answer is, “No.”

Really? Unless we're discussing one's very own private road, then the State may and must set limits and conditions upon the use of roads.

I-can-do-whatever-I-want-to-Neener-Neener Bump!