Yep, see that coming like a truck. For someone like myself, I've always ate healthy but it isn't enough. I have very high cholesterol and have to take a statin to keep it below 300. It's genetic and can't be helped. I also suffer from migraines, have my whole life, and through trial and error attempt to eliminate foods and situations that are triggers, most of those being junk foods containing some form of MSG or preservatives. So where will someone like myself fit in? Who knows, but I will not let them roll over me due to circumstances beyond my control..
My point, government involvement, while usually well intentioned, isn't always required or necessary and can lead to more problems. Such as, a cop disguised as a homeless guy to bag people for not wearing their seat belts...
I'll never understand seatbelt laws and the people who support them.
It should be your own prerogative if you want to go seatbelt-less and risk dieing. When is it the police's job to govern and regulate stupidity?
Case in point..
I hope all the other Darwinist fucks in this thread all develop genetic disorders that require hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical treatment. Your pathetic day jobs wouldn't pay for your life if you worked for all of it. You should probably hold to your Darwinist ideals and pay out every cent in your bank and go die in a ditch when your money has run dry...since Nature has death-marked you as a bag of flesh.
Damn the idiots here piss me off.
As long as the company I buy health insurance from has to cover an asshat who will not wear a seatbelt... they should get a ticket. It costs a lot more to stitch up your face from a trip through the windshield then it is to hand out some pain pills for some bruising from your seatbelt or airbag.
Same goes for wearing helmets when riding motorcycles. You don't want to wear one? fine... but either tattoo "do not resuscitate" to your forehead or purchase a $1,000,000 health policy to fix your cracked skull.
I would gladly died if I'm useless to society.
As long as the company I buy health insurance from has to cover an asshat who will not wear a seatbelt... they should get a ticket. It costs a lot more to stitch up your face from a trip through the windshield then it is to hand out some pain pills for some bruising from your seatbelt or airbag.
Same goes for wearing helmets when riding motorcycles. You don't want to wear one? fine... but either tattoo "do not resuscitate" to your forehead or purchase a $1,000,000 health policy to fix your cracked skull.
Simple fix just a liability clause in the contract, where if you are involved in an accident where you don't take preventative care then you are liable for your injuries. There is so much fine-print nowadays that this could be sneaked in rather easily.
It should be your own prerogative if you want to go seatbelt-less and risk dieing. When is it the police's job to govern and regulate stupidity?
It should be your own prerogative if you want to go seatbelt-less and risk dieing. When is it the police's job to govern and regulate stupidity?
When society deems it so. Dur...
they should use an undercover homeless prostitute.
that way when you give her money, you can get ticketed for no seatbelts AND arrested for soliciting a prostitute. lol
Might make sense except for the fact that the only real purpose of those laws is for the city to make some money.
The reason the US has a constitution is to keep utilitarians like you from impeding the rights of the minorities.
Once the government starts "modeling" proper behavior for people, like you said earlier, we descend into some kind of Orwellian style police state where everything is done for the "benefit" of the majority. Have fun with that, it will happen over my dead body.
If laws are not designed to maintain "proper behavior", what exactly is their purpose?
The reason the US has a constitution is to keep utilitarians like you from impeding the rights of the minorities.
Once the government starts "modeling" proper behavior for people, like you said earlier, we descend into some kind of Orwellian style police state where everything is done for the "benefit" of the majority. Have fun with that, it will happen over my dead body.
Really? And what part of the constitution are seat belt laws violating exactly? Because courts have generally upheld the constitutionality of seat belt laws in a variety of jurisdictions.
The general rationale for upholding seat belt laws is that such laws are a valid exercise of the police powers reserved to the states under the U.S. Constitution.
It is true that the U.S. Constitution guarantees certain fundamental freedoms. For instance the 14th Amendment provides that "no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process."
However, this does not mean that all restrictions on freedom or liberty are prohibited. It is only when fundamental freedoms are involved that the courts apply a "strict scrutiny" standard in deciding whether the restriction on liberty is permissible.
When it comes to something like seat belt laws, the courts have generally found that the restriction on your freedom or liberty is so minimal that "strict scrutiny" does not need to apply, and that the law need only be rationality related to some legitimate goal of government. And the courts have held that the safety of drivers is a legitimate goal of government, and seat belt laws are rationality related to this goal.
To ensure the liberties of those living under them.
I can see the argument for seat belt laws under the current system. I don't really agree with it, but I understand. I was talking about your posts saying that the government should model proper behavior for the citizens and that this behavior can be decided by social consensus.
I think that's a dangerous opinion to hold.
How do you ensure liberties for everyone without maintaining proper behavior in society?
Should every law governing an offense or crime be null and void if there is no victim? Do you want to throw traffic law entirely out the window unless there's an accident involved? Apparently so, because it's all about "proper behavior."
No, I said that the goal of seat belt laws is to change the behavior of drivers, maybe that was a poor choice of words on my part. I certainly see that as a definite outcome of the law though. It may have been passed simply as a safety mandate but the ultimate outcome is a change in the behavior of drivers...whether or not this was the intent I don't know.
You'd have to agree that pretty much any societal standard is there to affect behavior to a certain extent.
Cops don't make laws, btw. Go complain to the right people.
The provider.