Posted on 05/31/2006 9:42:50 AM PDT by from occupied ga
Many times people that break the laws are uncomfortable around police. I can understand why too.
We had 'em in the late '70's - early '80's. People threw a fit and they went away.
"Until such time as you can see the law changed you just have to follow it, or pay the consequences for not doing so. Personal responsibility can be a b!t@% sometimes. "
I absolutely agree with that statemet. Like I said, it is a game. Sometimes you land on Boardwalk and there is a hotel on it. Hopefully it is late in the game and you have the funds. ;)
Regarding the lap belt and buzzer. In my old car I just disconnected the buzzer.
Yous are still advocating a law to regulate personal and private behavior. The fact that it is imposed on the manufacturer does not make it one tiny bit less intrusive.
Well, unlike our Mexican friends, I have a fixed address and real identity. I'm the sort of person the system is set up to keep tabs on.
How you got all that about me wanting socialism is beyond me.
At this point, we do not live in a society where anyone has to take 100% ...or even anything close to that....responsibility for themselves. so if you decide to take a ride without a seatbelt and get injured and run out of your own insurance....we end up paying. That is the reality. Now, if you would like to make a law that says we let someone 'make it on their own" without any govt insurance or benefits...then I say fine, cancel mandatory seat belt laws.But you can't have it both ways.
I would rather people TAKE responsibility for themselves.But we don't have that now. Reality is not "you're for national health ins 100%".
If you want to take it all to the extremes you spouted...well, that is just not how the real world is.
That is not the case here. But to your point....
The law you voted for? Care to explain that one to me? Was it referendum vote and then a committee changed it after the people voted? Do you mean the law lawmakers voted on after they campaigned on a something other than they passed?
My wife and I already bought ours. If we go in a car crash, or thirty years later on a flight to the moon, it still costs the same.
well, assuming they bother to collect the bodies in the latter case. :)
If carmakers are required to have occupants belted in so that the vehicle will operate, much like a bobcat is how do you find that against you personally?
When you buy a riding lawn mower there is a safety feature that shuts off the PTO when you lift off the seat, is that a violation of my rights wanting to have the PTO running when I am off the mower?
Seems my opinion is shared by many that engineer various kinds of equipment already.
Sorry, when you mention the Chevy fuel tanks, I can only think of the slanderous news broadcast that had to use fireworks to get the tank to ignite in a demo.
That is correct my young friend!
It was a state wide referendum vote put to the general public. I've stated it a few times in this thread. Glad to see you finally caught it.
It was changed in committee.
Each State that enacted this law followed the same pattern.
They campaigned for the law as a NON-STOPPABLE offense. People voted thinking this was true.
A few years into the laws existance each state modified the referendum by committee.
No it would not!
So many people now drive with the bare minimum of insurance and so you would have to make a law that says you have to have "mandatory" ins.
Repeat it enough times to make it the truth right elk?
You are not in a position to decide what markers are used for establishing DUI. Your elected officials are. The very same ones that decide on laws about seat belts. Right?
Claiming you do not understand a simple direct question is a cop out elk so I see no need to continue.
'common sense'
The vast majority have never had the oppurtunity to work on an impaled, crushed, eviscerated, dismembered human in a medical setting. It's not fun.
If you choose not to be belted, so be it. But there should be a disclaimer clause on your insurance that they will cover NOTHING when you go thru the Veg-O-Matic.
I see alot of opposition in this discussion and the only alternative I see coming from that side is do away with the law entirely. That equals opposition without solution to me.
Care to pose something as a solution besides just doing away with the law? My guess is that you will answer No to that question.
When the law intrudes on the manufacturer (you must be a hug believer in government micro-regulating free enterprise) it is intruding on me and my right to purchase what I want.
What kind of cars elk? What brand? What model? I have been around cars all my life and have never ever seen these that you claim exist. Teach me something by showing me these cars you claim existed beacuse I have never heard of them. I sure would like to see some examples though.
So then the only thing you have to offer this discussion is to remove law then? Where do you stop when that is your chosen action?
Maybe you could try rephrasing in English?
On second thought, that would require a logical, reasoned answer from me, which you will then denounce as anarchistic.
You're right, there is no point continuing.
I understand that point and it is a fair one. I knew someone would bring that up so I offered the mercury as an addition because they really were dangerous.
:)
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.