chicowalker

getting way OT: What exactly is your standard for laws and regulations, then? Are speed limits and drunk driving laws also preposterous?

Look, I happen to agree with you about both the black boxes and seatbelt laws and helmet laws. My own answer is that insurance companies would either refuse coverage for people not wearing seatbelts / helmets or charge much higher rates for those who say they won't do so.

But you haven't answered the question of what should happen when somebody is in an accident and insurance won't cover it. One way or another, somebody will be forced to pay, unless charity steps in. Should all motorcyclists / car drivers pay extra on their registration to go towards those costs? Should all taxpayers contribute? Or should the government not fund those people's victims? (though the issue of any kids remains, I guess) I'm just asking what your own opinion is.

(Or is the only issue you have one of which level of government is making the laws in question?)

Real World

Let's just ban motorcycles altogether then.

Come to think about it, we should ban football. Some players crack their spine and become paraplegics.


I've said from the start of this thread that there is a "good" that comes from these freedom eliminating laws. My point is that any law that removes and restricts your rights can be sold as "doing a lot of good". The question is whether that good is truly warranted. I say in many cases it is not. There is no reason that I, as an adult, needs to wear a seat belt or face a fine. There's no need for me, as an adult, to be forced to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle. That doesn't mean that I don't wear a seatbelt, or wouldn't wear a helmet were I riding a bike. It simply means that one should not be mandated. The more and more you allow the nanny state to act in a manner that they feel does "a lot of good", the less and less you will be freely able to do. Eventually at some point they will begin to mandate, restrict, outlaw, or eliminate something that you truly do enjoy, or hold dear.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Real World

Tell me the proposed law and I'll tell you what my standard is. They're not one size fits all laws, and no where would I ever say that some laws aren't legitimate, necessary, or warranted. Drunk driving clearly puts other innocents at risk, just as driving at excessive speeds does. My wearing a seat belt harms only me. Same for a helmet. It's more or less a matter of when a law is not acting as a protection to others, from the actions of the one, and instead is a matter of some suits (the nanny state gubmit) telling free, independent individuals how to live their lives.


Seatbelts and helmets aren't required in every state right now, so why would that be an issue?

What happens when anyone walks into an ER and has no coverage (illegals persay), or a call comes in that some random person is laying comatose in the streets? To point to some outward extreme as a reason to restrict individual liberty is a very slipperly slope to travel. Like I've been saying since my first post. I can come up with a million new restrictions, or do gooder laws due to the "a lot of good" they would do, and if you open the defense of those laws to potentially saving other people money, then no one would ever be able to do anything.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

chicowalker

I was just wondering how you view it. Some people don't even approve of drunk driving laws, and I think their arguments have some merit.

(I don't think there should be speed limits on many highways, actually.)


wasn't saying it's an issue at all


QUOTE=Real World;2481083]...What happens when anyone walks into an ER and has no coverage (illegals persay), or a call comes in that some random person is laying comatose in the streets? To point to some outward extreme as a reason to restrict individual liberty is a very slipperly slope to travel. Like I've been saying since my first post. I can come up with a million new restrictions, or do gooder laws due to the "a lot of good" they would do, and if you open the defense of those laws to potentially saving other people money, then no one would ever be able to do anything.[/QUOTE]

I agree re ERs, but I don't think the costs are an extreme, and nowhere was I saying that they justify the laws -- I was saying that mrs is correct in pointing out that, like it or not, somewhere there is a tradeoff to be made.

Real World

I agree re ERs, but I don't think the costs are an extreme, and nowhere was I saying that they justify the laws -- I was saying that mrs is correct in pointing out that, like it or not, somewhere there is a tradeoff to be made.[/QUOTE]

There's certainly some logic to her point. Again though, I've said as much about these laws from the go. The point is whether or not that is enough to impose a mandate on everyones ability to choose freely.

I could live with no speed limits maybe, but it would depend on the specifics. Clearly we'd need them on some more congested (sp?) highways, but out on the open parts of road, sure.

What I do hate is attaching insurance surcharges to tickets. That's total BS to me. Accidents should determine your risk as a driver.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Real World

I forgot traffic cameras. Utter BS. I got a ticket in the mail from Maryland 3 months after I was there. A camera snapped a picture of my plate and said I was speeding. I was? How could I ever know for sure 3 months later. Totally infuriating to me. The part that stuck out to me was the location of the camera. It was on the return road to the massive car rental area outside the airport. So what they do is tag the drivers returning cars knwoing full well they can't appeal and will be forced to pay.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

chicowalker

I agree with all of that (particularly the tickets/insurance/accidents part, if that comes from the govt rather than the actuarial tables).

Michael

Get use to it. It won't be long before you get your inspection sticker and a bill for all speeding downloaded to their computer. Or maybe they'll just add it to your excise tax. It just warms the left side of my heart.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The Brandon Five

They were literally everywhere in the UK.

Middle of nowhere? Speed camera.

Traffic light? Camera to make sure you don't try to beat a yellow, take off early, or ignore a red light at 2 AM.

Driving out of London early on a Monday morning (i.e. leaving)? Camera to capture vehicles in the "Congestion Zone" without a hall pass.

There are also cameras monitoring people on the street in different places.

And yet, it is still the "most violent country in Europe":

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Mail Online

Having more violence than South Africa is a real achievement.

Real World

What's ironic about this thread is that I just got another ticket in the mail for a motor vehicle violation. This time it was from the Rome Police. It's for 105 Euros. The last time I was in Rome was August of 2009. This camera BS is comical.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897