Black Boxes in Cars - Good Idea or Invasion of privacy. - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

Mrs.PatsFanInVa · 02-11-2011, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

I'm an adult, and I should never have to wear a seat belt if I don't want to, just like it's my car, and no one should ever mandate that I put a GPS tracking device inside it.

I feel the same way about motorcycle helmet laws.

Be that as it may, they have done a lot of good and they have saved a lot of lives.

They've also saved a lot of money. People who drive without seatbelts and people who ride without helmets can be said to "only hurt themselves," but that's not exactly accurate.

They are the very ones who most often end up with life altering head injuries - the veggies, so to speak. Private insurance and auto/bike insurance only pay so much and they then become wards of the state.

Any idea what it costs the taxpaying public to keep someone (usually a young someone since they are the most likely to avoid wearing belts and helmets) alive on a vent in an insitiution (or even at home) for 40 or 50 years?

Probably somewhere upwards of $4,000 per day or 1.5 million yearly.

That's the thing about thinking or saying that an individual's actions can only be harmful to himself - it's never really true.

Real World · 02-11-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.PatsFanInVa

I feel the same way about motorcycle helmet laws.

Be that as it may, they have done a lot of good and they have saved a lot of lives.

They've also saved a lot of money. People who drive without seatbelts and people who ride without helmets can be said to "only hurt themselves," but that's not exactly accurate.

They are the very ones who most often end up with life altering head injuries - the veggies, so to speak. Private insurance and auto/bike insurance only pay so much and they then become wards of the state.

Any idea what it costs the taxpaying public to keep someone (usually a young someone since they are the most likely to avoid wearing belts and helmets) alive on a vent in an insitiution (or even at home) for 40 or 50 years?

Probably somewhere upwards of $4,000 per day or 1.5 million yearly.

That's the thing about thinking or saying that an individual's actions can only be harmful to himself - it's never really true.

** sigh**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Which reinforces my original point in this thread. Lots of freedom stripping, individual liberty eliminating, do good policies and laws can be justified by the "a lot of good that comes from it" argument. The more and more "a lot of good" laws that are passed, the less and less individual liberty we retain. I'm all set thanks. I'm an adult, and I should never have to wear a seat belt if I don't want to, just like it's my car, and no one should ever mandate that I put a GPS tracking device inside it. Wait till they start regulating your diet for the "a lot of good" it's going to do for the public.

Waiter: "Would you want desert?
Customer: Absolutely. What kind of ice cream do you have?
Waiter: Ice cream? We can't sell that.
Customer: ????? Ok, how about a nice piece of chocolate cake then.
Waiter: Cake? I'm sorry, cake was banned 3 years ago.
Customer: Banned? Well, what do you have then.
Waiter: Well, how does a tofu cabbage rice wafer drizzled in elephant seaman sound?"

The Brandon Five · 02-11-2011, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wistahpatsfan

When I was in high school in the late 70s,-early 80s, my parents had no idea what i was doing during the weekdays or nights. I played three sports so much of my time was taken up by practice and games, and in between i worked. Any time left over was for me. I had a girlfriend, but sometimes I wound down with friends in the woods, drove around, or went hunting and fishing. I can't even imagining what i would have though of growing up in today's surveilance-crazed, paranoid society. I made so many mistakes when i was a kid, but i learned so much about decision-making and time control. I bought my own POS car, paid my own gas, and never EVER asked my parents for "spending money" after I started working. If my car needed a fuel pump, I went to the junkyard and installed it myself with a screwdriver and a 9/16 wrench when i was 17.

I don't think things are the same, but there is no good reason to be afraid enough to monitor your kid's every move, unless of course you are worried you have done an inadequate job of parenting. If you indulge your child her entire life maybe you should watch her. If you teach them the value of their own life and show them how important it is to respect others as they would themselves, then I think there would be serious repercussions if you hover over them at a time when they need to become themselves. What signal do we send them when we show them that we don't trust them? Everyone says they worry more about other kids- not their own. That's crap. Truth is, people are more worried that they have done a crappy job as parents either because they worked too much, let them watch too much TV and video games, or over-indulged their every wish. I think deep down, parents today know they are producing ignorant, self-absorbed punks who are unable to think for themselves or behave responsibly on their own. That's why black boxes in cars is even being discussed today.

I agree with the Mrs. You have to let go and you can if you've done a good job. Trust of parents is huge for a teenager. Putting a kid in a blackbox situation being monitored by cameras and GPS should result in rebellion and resistance in a normal human being. I worry about a world in which teenagers never rebel and do what they're told all the time. I suppose we deserve what we get when we set up such a society where children own $300 phones and stay in the house until they're 25.

I still think that training wheels are needed to some extent. Modern neuroscience has taught us that the teenage brain is not really equipped to make adult decisions.

The Teen Brain: It's Just Not Grown Up Yet : NPR

chicowalker · 02-11-2011, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Which reinforces my original point in this thread. Lots of freedom stripping, individual liberty eliminating, do good policies and laws can be justified by the "a lot of good that comes from it" argument. The more and more "a lot of good" laws that are passed, the less and less individual liberty we retain. I'm all set thanks. I'm an adult, and I should never have to wear a seat belt if I don't want to, just like it's my car, and no one should ever mandate that I put a GPS tracking device inside it. Wait till they start regulating your diet for the "a lot of good" it's going to do for the public.

Waiter: "Would you want desert?
Customer: Absolutely. What kind of ice cream do you have?
Waiter: Ice cream? We can't sell that.
Customer: ????? Ok, how about a nice piece of chocolate cake then.
Waiter: Cake? I'm sorry, cake was banned 3 years ago.
Customer: Banned? Well, what do you have then.
Waiter: Well, how does a tofu cabbage rice wafer drizzled in elephant seaman sound?"

I wasn't saying it justifies seatbelt laws (for adults) -- I was pointing out a distinction between the two.

(I do think seatbelts should be required for minors and for new drivers. I only believe they should be required for all drivers if there is a clear safety benefit to others from drivers being more secure in their seats -- but I don't know whether that exists.)

chicowalker · 02-11-2011, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

[CENTER]** sigh**
...

You kind of avoided her point here.

Something has to give -- maybe the answer isn't helmet laws, but if it's not, the cost / care issue needs to be addressed. Is the answer that the government won't pay for motorcyclists' care? If so, we're back to the dreaded death panels. Should insurers be required to cover it? if so, we've got more business regulation and higher premiums.

Real World · 02-11-2011, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicowalker

You kind of avoided her point here.

Something has to give -- maybe the answer isn't helmet laws, but if it's not, the cost / care issue needs to be addressed. Is the answer that the government won't pay for motorcyclists' care? If so, we're back to the dreaded death panels. Should insurers be required to cover it? if so, we've got more business regulation and higher premiums.

I avoided a point? Where, when, how, why? More like she ignored my point. There's always an "a lot of good" argument that can be made to justify just about any freedom removing piece of law, or legislation. Her example is another in that line.

chicowalker · 02-11-2011, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

I avoided a point? Where, when, how, why? More like she ignored my point. There's always an "a lot of good" argument that can be made to justify just about any freedom removing piece of law, or legislation. Her example is another in that line.

I don't think she ignored your point at all -- I thought she acknowledged it, actually.

But her point was about the costs and care that increase if helmets aren't worn. It's fine to say that those aren't reason enough to require the law -- and I'm guessing you have a point of view on how to deal with the increased healthcare costs that would ensue.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa · 02-11-2011, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

I avoided a point? Where, when, how, why? More like she ignored my point. There's always an "a lot of good" argument that can be made to justify just about any freedom removing piece of law, or legislation. Her example is another in that line.

I didn't mean to "avoid" anything. I was simply responding to your claim that you, as an individual, had a right to choose to do or not do certain things. I was assuming (and maybe that's where I went wrong) that you felt you could have that choice because your choice would affect no one but yourself.

If I was wrong in my assumption, please tell me what your rationalizations are.

Do you also think you (and everyone else) should be able to choose to drive without insurance, or to drive at 13 years old if you (and your parents) so choose? Should child safety seat laws be repealed?

Real World · 02-11-2011, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicowalker

I don't think she ignored your point at all -- I thought she acknowledged it, actually.

But her point was about the costs and care that increase if helmets aren't worn. It's fine to say that those aren't reason enough to require the law -- and I'm guessing you have a point of view on how to deal with the increased healthcare costs that would ensue.

There are costs associated with just about anything though Chico. If you eat Twinkies and donuts every day, or weigh 500 pounds, won't you possibly cost me and others money? So I guess since some guy without a helmet, who can't afford to pay for himself if he's in an accident might cost people money, then EVERYONE who rides a motorcycle should be required to wear a helmet. That's propostrous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.PatsFanInVa

I didn't mean to "avoid" anything. I was simply responding to your claim that you, as an individual, had a right to choose to do or not do certain things. I was assuming (and maybe that's where I went wrong) that you felt you could have that choice because your choice would affect no one but yourself.

If I was wrong in my assumption, please tell me what your rationalizations are.

Do you also think you (and everyone else) should be able to choose to drive without insurance, or to drive at 13 years old if you (and your parents) so choose? Should child safety seat laws be repealed?

Without insurance? What does that have to do with the price of banana's? Like I've said before, just about any and every "a lot of good" argument can be made in some fashion. The problem I have is that just because something does "a lot of good" it doesn't mean it's warranted by way of a freedom eliminating mandate. My having a cold could cost you money. If I come to work with a cold, or some other contageous illness, and get you sick it will mean money to someone. So should the gubmit mandate that everyone with a cold be quarantined, or live in a plastic bubble until perfectly healthy? Hey, that might even spur new industries for items like this.

Hmm...I wonder if this bubble suit would be required to have a blackbox installed. At the very least it's operators would certainly have to wear a helmet.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa · 02-11-2011, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

So I guess since some guy without a helmet, who can't afford to pay for himself if he's in an accident might cost people money, then EVERYONE who rides a motorcycle should be required to wear a helmet.

No one who's in a motorcycle accident who sustains a large brain injury can afford it, RW. It doesn't matter what kind of insurance they have or how much money they've saved. It's a lifelong expense and, unless Obamacare goes through, there are caps on what insurance will pay.

Quote:

My having a cold could cost you money. If I come to work with a cold, or some other contageous illness, and get you sick it will mean money to someone. So should the gubmit mandate that everyone with a cold be quarantined, or live in a plastic bubble until perfectly healthy?

Look, I'm not really trying to argue with you here. I've already said I don't like helmet laws or blackbox laws. But that doesn't mean I don't understand why they're there sometimes. It's not a sin to disagree with something and still understand how what's yuck to an individual is yaygood! to a society.

As for the government mandating certain restrictions on people with certain diseases, it's been a law in the past and there are laws right now which mandate responses to some particular illnesses - most especially contagious ones.

Are they all bad? Certainly you can agree that if someone is HIV+ the government has the right to restrict his sexual activity by making it a crime, can't you? At one time lepers were sent to an island without hope of leaving. In countries where multi-drug therapy is readliy available this no longer happens, but there are still several countries which quarantine lepers routinely. Not so long ago in the USA a person with TB was quarantined until proclaimed non-contageous. There are new strands of TB still today which require those infected to be legally committed to a health setting until cured. Would you argue against that happening?

My point is, since we do not exist as totally separate individuals but as a collective society, we have to at least look at all the reasons and all the possible outcomes and consequences of any given action as they affect the entirety of the population around us and not just as one unconnected, uninvolved human being.