ANSWERS: 5
  • I don't for a minute think that they are the only ones hurt in an accident and that the crime is victimless....what about the psychological impact on the other person in the accident? I agree with compulsory seat belt laws. We have laws for the good of society. They are not perfect nor will they ever be...but they are the best form of making the system functional that we have.
  • If your corpse is willing to get up after your death, and wash your brains, blood, or anything else off the road ways, and then call your family, and tell them the bad news, great. Victimless crime. Untill then the tax payers are paying people to scrape you up off the road, we're paying the police to hunt down your family, and paying some poor bastard to be the one to call your family and tell them you're dead. Your freedoms stops where my responsibility begins.
  • I think this is Darwin's thero. of evo. in motion, If you are stupid enough not to want to be protected in a crash, go ahead, it population control to me
  • There are considerable knock-on consequences for those who have to clean up the scene of the accident, those who care for the injured driver etc. In a country with any level of socialised medicine (including emergency wards required to accept anybody), there will be real and significant costs. Driving without seatbelts is considerably more dangerous than many drugs. As long as we do not treat drug taking and personal ownership as victimless, we should not treat driving without seatbelts the same. Equally, the infringement in liberties of airport x-rays, shoe inspections is much greater - and yet they do not protest about that. Even if we legalised all drugs etc., there is still a cost/benefit argument: the infringement in civil liberties is tiny compared to the benefit. I think most people complaining about it ate making a fuss for the sake of it, and would find something else moan about. The real threats to civil liberties are no-fly lists, phone tapping etc.
  • are we living as individuals who are adults and are responsable for themselfs and there actions or do we need to be babysat and controlled? think about it! it's just another form of controlling by gov't that is affraid we will catch onto them stealing our money and misuseing it. By saying a law protect the public when in fact it protects the insurance company's. unnessary gov't regulation. insurance company's can deny coverage for not wearing aseat belt. gov't has become a babysitter because u willing give up your rights.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy