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.
So you are just annoyed that you have to pay a small fine when you get caught, but you have no problem with risking throwing yourself through a windshield...sounds like solid logic.
Obviously, an open container law, or a public drinking law will be ineffective at stopping overconsumption and liver problems. Nor will limiting the places you can smoke necessarily prevent lung cancer in smokers, but those are not only problems associated with drinking and smoking.
I simply provided reasons why the laws restricting the place of drinking and smoking curb some of the problems associated with drinking and smoking.
As to not wearing seat belts I think that is a different argument. I was simply responding to your question about curbing the effects of drinking and smoking.
I don't. It's about safety. Personal safety. If we're outlawing things that put you at personal risk, without harming anybody else, than smoking and drinking are valid arguments.
So you are just annoyed that you have to pay a small fine when you get caught, but you have no problem with risking throwing yourself through a windshield...sounds like solid logic.
Let's pass a law where we fine smokers for smoking and drinkers for drinking. Let's fine anybody who puts THEMSELVES at risk. That's the logic your using.
I'm starting this thread after a lengthy conversation with a police officer today. How do you posters feel about seatbelt laws? Personally, I feel like it gives officers too much authority. Nobody will be harmed, but yourself for not wearing a seatbelt. Shouldn't there be public awareness campaigns rather than law enforcement of the issue?
I'll be harmed because your insurance will pay for your health care, and that means I'm paying for your health care if we have the same insurance company.
If you don't have health care, I'm paying for it because the hospital will charge other patients more to cover a bill you'll likely not pay, or you're on welfare, and my taxes will pay for your care.
Sure it's a slippery slope, but this is such an obviously common sense thing to do, that it boggles the mind that people are stupid enough not to wear seat belts.
Another argument would be parents setting an example for children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe
Let's pass a law where we fine smokers for smoking and drinkers for drinking. Let's fine anybody who puts THEMSELVES at risk. That's the logic your using.
Many places do have such laws. The fact remains that negligent behavior often effects not just the person behaving negligently.
Why do we have speed limits? They don't prevent you from driving as fast as you want.
If you speed to fast and cause an accident, your harming someone else. Your not harming anyone BUT yourself if you don't wear a seatbelt. See the difference?
I'll be harmed because your insurance will pay for your health care, and that means I'm paying for your health care if we have the same insurance company.
If you don't have health care, I'm paying for it because the hospital will charge other patients more to cover a bill you'll likely not pay, or you're on welfare, and my taxes will pay for your care.
Sure it's a slippery slope, but this is such an obviously common sense thing to do, that it boggles the mind that people are stupid enough not to wear seat belts.
Another argument would be parents setting an example for children.
The bold is the only valid argument I've heard in this thread.
As far as setting an example for children, you've got no case. If we fined bad parents we wouldn't be in a deficit And also, the law would be exempt for single drivers with no kids.
Let's pass a law where we fine smokers for smoking and drinkers for drinking. Let's fine anybody who puts THEMSELVES at risk. That's the logic your using.
No, that is not using my logic, that is called ignoring facts.
Seat belts have been proven to save lives in accidents, if you make not wearing them illegal you increase the number of people who wear seat belts, thus saving more lives. Do laws stop people from wearing a seat belt? No, but it does discourage it. You don't have to wear a seat belt, but that is the risk you take.
If you choose not to listen to logic, I can't help you understand this.
The bold is the only valid argument I've heard in this thread.
As far as setting an example for children, you've got no case. If we fined bad parents we wouldn't be in a deficit And also, the law would be exempt for single drivers with no kids.
I think you'd be making a simple law unnecessarily complex, regardless, a law can serve multiple purposes, one of which in this case is to minimize the number of children who would be learning from the poor example set by their parents.
I think you'd be making a simple law unnecessarily complex, regardless, a law can serve multiple purposes, one of which in this case is to minimize the number of children who would be learning from the poor example set by their parents.
Or pulling over minorities and having an undebateable excuse to pull them over.
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.
And also, the law would be exempt for single drivers with no kids.