Health Issues The Everything Covid 19 Thread
- Thread starter shyvas
- Start date
Seatbelt laws are indeed tyrannical, if someone doesn't want to wear a seatbelt they're only harming themselves.
Same goes for mandatory evacuation, if someone wants risk their own life by staying on their property that's their own business, it doesn't harm anyone else.
Lou
Forum Legend
Neither of those statements are true.
Lets say that you die in car accident. and your death could have been prevented by wearing a seatbelt. How many people besides you were harmed? Your parents? they probably feel bad about losing a child. Your teachers? all the time and energy they put in educating you. then if you were married and had kids? and what if you had an important job? your employer and all the people you work with have been harmed. then of course there is the first responders who had to scrape your brain off the windshield. They are casualties too. and if you are just brain dead and spend the rest of your life in a coma, society is harmed by paying the bills for your life support.
More or less the same for evacuations. Mostly its because of the people who then end up risking their life rescuing you.
As I've said before, as a member of a civilized society you have certain responsibilities. I realize that you would rather live all by yourself in the woods. but until then just stfu.
"unjustly cruel, harsh, or severe; arbitrary or oppressive"
Nope. Not seeing any correlation with those examples.
Seatbelts are restraints. They are designed to not only restrain the person so they don't injure themselves, by design, they keep the driver in control of the wheel,the gas and brake pedals.They keep the passengers restrained from flying into the driver. An unrestrained occupant in a vehicle involved in an accident, regardless of fault, is a danger to both themselves, the other occupants,and the occupants in cars around them.
In many states you are required to carry collision insurance, so if you are involved in an accident you have the ability to compensate the injured party. Is this also tyrannical? The price of all types of insurance is regulated by the cost to the insuring company. The less they need to pay out in claims, the lower the cost.Now many insurers will off discounts to good drivers,to those with safety features,as well as those who will use a monitoring device.
Your comparison to evacuation brings to mind the same thinking towards those able but unwilling to vaccinate--that they should be denied the use of our overburdened medical facilities.
If we were under a tyrannical regime, we would indeed allow people to become stranded without aid, suffer from their own ignorance, and do nothing to prevent the victims of those who are injured by the thoughtlessness of others
How about the requirements for school children with lice to be treated before they can return to school? Surely there are those parents who feel this is very much a violation of their beliefs, and school is a right.
Is this not in your definition of tyranny?
Is this not in your definition of tyranny?
I don't care if it's to protect people, It violates the principles of self ownership, and as far as I'm concerned anything that does that is tyrannical.
David3
Forum Legend
.
Not true.
Unbelted drivers and passengers can cause fatal injuries to others who ride with them
Drivers or passengers protected by seat belts are at increased risk for fatal injuries if others who ride with them fail to wear their seat belts.
www.washington.edu
So what's your idea on compensating the victims?
And I guess you would be opposed to sending kids with lice home.
And how dare the government restrict what you can put in the water supply--esp if it's on your property!
Why can't kids buy alcohol?
How dare they tell anyone how to treat their animals!How dare anyone keep animals!
Food corporations shouldn't be held to safety guidelines. It should be up to the consumer to decide if they want to buy their products.
Bring back DDT!
Lead paint was better, cars ran better on leaded gasoline- freedom of choice!
David3
Forum Legend
.
I know you're only 14 or 15, but if you're not willing to accept certain personal restrictions in order to protect other people, you're going to be a very lonely person.
.
Last edited:
David3
Forum Legend
So...when people overstep the limits of their own liberties, and interferes with the freedoms of others, who makes the judgement call?
The guy with the gun?
Lord of the Flies was lost on you!
What victims? If someone robs you house you're a victim, if someone you love dies because of their own choices that's sad but you're not a victim, you don't own that person, they do, and they can do what they like with their own life.
No, Schools can choose who attends.
What does that have to do with it? You don't have the right to poison people without their consent. I really don't see how that relates to what I said.
Good question, it doesn't harm anyone except themselves I think they should be allowed to.
Animals are people just like humans and should have their freedoms protected.
Indeed.
Why not? People are going to buy food that they know is safe, the free market is amazing.
No, That's not a matter of personal freedom, as it's basically poisoning people.
People know the dangers of lead today, so it should be allowed, no one will buy it.
Then again if they're a mature adult they understood the risk when they decided to ride with this person, so this is only really relevant if there's a child in the car. or if you're kidnapping someone, but in that case you've already violated their freedoms in a far worse manner.
David3
Forum Legend
.
Not everyone realizes that it's risky to ride in a car with someone who isn't seat-belted (you didn't realize it, until about 15 minutes ago). The risk exists nevertheless.
.
Last edited:
David3
Forum Legend
You're right. There's no nutrition misinformation anywhere on the internet. People are not at all confused about which foods are safe. Companies never attempt to obscure the risks of their products. Tobacco, anyone? Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement - Wikipedia
Last edited:
There's much you don't know. The more you know,the more you'll find that you don't know
Seatbelts do not only protect the occupents in their own vehicle, the protect the other drivers, pedestrians and even any animals on the road, because an unrestrained driver has lost all control. An unrestrained passenger is a flying object.
You consistently prove that you're only concerned with your own preconceived ideas of personal freedoms, and NOT the reality.
Others who advocate anarchy and personal liberty will easily argue.
David3
Forum Legend
.
You probably don't want to hear this from me, but you're doing the correct thing - the thing that all young people do. You push, and the older people push back. It's learning to live in a civilization. Even an anarchic squat has certain rules of consideration and respect - that's civilization.
.
Similar threads
