Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
all the studies surveys show how important seat belts are, and i believe most, if not all states have the click it or ticket campaign.
shouldnt it be left up to us whether or not we wear a seat belt. it only impacts us, doesnt harm anybody else.
at the same time this is something most people are ok with being forced to do.
imo we shouldnt need a law on the books, and leave it up to the people.
i myself rarely wear my seatbelt. not overweight or anything, just dont like the feel of it.
I think that if you should refuse to wear seat-belt than you should also be the last person to receive help if you are in a car accident. Because you refuse to protect yourself, why should others be any more concerned about you?
no I am not ok with it, it is a matter of freedom. this is something that should never have been in the pervue of any goverment. I wear my seatbelt because it is the safe thing to do, but I dont want the goverment forcing me to wear one.
And here is the $100,000 question:
Had the goverment not mandated that you wear your seatbelt for safety reasons....would you have ever started to wear one?
Would you be sitting in your car one day and say...."gee you know, driving this car with no restraint system is really dangerous. I think I'll invent some type of lap/shoulder harness thing that will protect me when/if I get into a crash."
all the studies surveys show how important seat belts are, and i believe most, if not all states have the click it or ticket campaign.
shouldnt it be left up to us whether or not we wear a seat belt. it only impacts us, doesnt harm anybody else.
at the same time this is something most people are ok with being forced to do.
imo we shouldnt need a law on the books, and leave it up to the people.
i myself rarely wear my seatbelt. not overweight or anything, just dont like the feel of it.
As long as you pay your own medical/funeral expenses as you fly thru the windshield. I, as one of the 50% who pay taxes, don't want to pay for your lack of smarts.
My father in law is one of those people who refuses to wear seat belt because the big bad government told him it is the law. Suddenly he was is a car accident and got banged up really bad, but survived.. The guy who hit him was an illegal alien that ended up leaving the country. He blamed that guy and the government, for all the medical expenses. Imagine why?
It could have been avoided if he had worn a seat belt.
It wasn't always the law. I remember the days when it wasn't a law and I didn't agree with it when it was forced on everyone in the first place, so the point that it "exists, so therefore it is acceptable" is irrelevant. I object to anything that is a matter of infringement to individual liberty. The fact that I may do something already is not grounds to demand everyone do it as well. That is absurd.
But see, it wasn't just YOU. The law was passed for the better good of the population as a whole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
It is not the laws place to dictate to me my individual choice. It has no business in mandating such. the fact that I may do such of my own choice is not support to claim that it is just in mandating others to do it. Again, this is the failed logic of people today. Because I do it, does not justify forcing others to do it as well. It is convoluted logic.
The law is not removing your individual choice. You are still free to CHOOSE to not wear your seatbelt. Just be prepared to pay the fine if you are caught not doing it. From the dawn of time there has always been consequences for the choices you make. Deal with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
There is no guise, there is an issue of ever infringing polices that are being mandated on people to which no authority exists. Our rights are inalienable, they are not under the discretion and authority of another to decide as they choose because they personally think it would be better for us. Only you know what is best for you and this is the responsibility entirely under your discretion, not another.
So...you're saying that it's never ok for someone to decide what is best for you eh? By that logic parents will never be able to decide what is best for their children? Sorry sir, I must disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
Nature culls the stupid through life lessons and in some cases ultimate lessons. Why would we want to protect people from natures work when doing so only endangers society from suffering that of the stupid? The best teacher for the stupid is the consequence of stupids actions. If someone is stupid enough to put their hand in fire, they will get burned. This hurts only stupid. If stupid continues to do such, then stupid will cull themselves from existence.
If you want to save stupid, by all means, proactively attempt to inform stupid of its poor actions. Past that, you have no authority to do demand anything past that and certainly not by identifying everyone as being stupid with a law that blankets and restricts all under such assumption. Sometimes there are risks people are willing to take under certain conditions, yet "laws" are blanket type means to which removes the freedom of an individual to determine the risks and take them for themselves, something that only the individual has the authority of decision to make.
As I said, I could come up with numerous laws of the very same nature to which you are attempting to support and imprison you with them to which you most certainly would object, yet you do not object to this because you agree with it. If you can not respect the individual liberty of another, then you deserve no liberty for yourself and through your self interest to promote such removal of liberty from others will surely be the chains that bind you eventually into servitude. Either you respect individual liberty, or you do not. There is no middle road.
There is the entire problem with your arguement. It's contradictive in and of itself. So I am to "accept the individual liberties of another" huh? Nah. I only have to be comfortable with my personal liberties. Personally, I'm fine with the goverment telling me that I have to wear a seatbelt. I'm fine with the goverment telling me that I have to wear a helmet on my motorcycle. I ONLY have to accept MY OWN personal freedoms and liberties.
This is what I don't get about nanny-statism. I recall in my sociology class, my professor asked the class what they thought about the seatbelt laws, and to our surprise the person defending the seatbelt laws was a very Republican female student. And that's the most truthful thing I've heard on here. With freedom comes great responsibility.
I want a repeal of all laws protecting us from ourselves, but I support states that won't to keep them. My preferred state, however, would not have such laws
Yep, the right can be just as disrespectful as the left when it concerns infringement of individual liberty. If you go to a left oriented state, you will see laws that dictate left ideology that are infringements and if you go to a right oriented state, you will see laws that dictate right ideology. Both are wrong as they can not justify their position other than to claim it protects the well being of society from some "good intention" point of view.
So...you're saying that it's never ok for someone to decide what is best for you eh? By that logic parents will never be able to decide what is best for their children? Sorry sir, I must disagree.
I think the parent/child relationship is irrelevant in this discussion. We are talking about adults here.
There is the entire problem with your arguement. It's contradictive in and of itself. So I am to "accept the individual liberties of another" huh? Nah. I only have to be comfortable with my personal liberties. Personally, I'm fine with the goverment telling me that I have to wear a seatbelt. I'm fine with the goverment telling me that I have to wear a helmet on my motorcycle. I ONLY have to accept MY OWN personal freedoms and liberties.
When it comes to motorcycle helmet laws, I say yes, and I'm for strict enforcement. The motorcyclist always loses, and is often severely disabled for life and unable to work again.
Observing the posted speed limit seems kinda socialist.
/sarcasm
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
