You have that freedom, as long as you're on private roads.
Should it be legally OK to not wear a seatbelt?
- Thread starter GhostWriter16
- Start date
You have that freedom, as long as you're on private roads.
mangxema
I
I meant to you as a driver. Although honestly I don't think costs of enforcement would be all that high.
Gay sex is not a sacred cow. However, if you're going to wrap your arguments in libertarian language, you ought to recognize one of their key ideas, the victimless crime: Any act for which all affected parties consent ought to be legal. So it doesn't matter why people would want gay sex to be legal; some people want to do that and as long as they aren't being coercive (e.g., rape), that ought to be enough from a libertarian perspective.GhostWriter16
Deity
Yes, even though it is more dangerous to them than straight sex. That's my whole point. Even though driving without a seatbelt is dangerous to the person doing it, it is a victimless crime.
If this thread's established anything, it's that driving without a seatbelt is not a victimless crime.
If you were paying attention to people posting before you, a person in the backseat not wearing a seatbelt is more dangerous to a person in the front seat, even if they are, in the case of an accident. It's not a victimless crime.
Seriously dude, read their posts.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Children should always wear seatbelts. Above a certain age I'm pretty ambivalent. I like the idea of allowing people choice, but with that comes increased danger and liability issues in the event of an accident.
Let's say I crash into someone's vehicle, and let's presume that I made the error in driving, the guy flies through the windshield and dies, if he wore his seatbelt he would have likely been okay. Am I suddenly responsible for the guy's death?
Let's say I crash into someone's vehicle, and let's presume that I made the error in driving, the guy flies through the windshield and dies, if he wore his seatbelt he would have likely been okay. Am I suddenly responsible for the guy's death?
mangxema
I
Setting aside the whole 'gay' vs. 'straight' sex canard, I'll just say that the part that you're overlooking is: all affected parties.
Legally, absolutely yes.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Spoiler :
I'm 17, I wouldn't really consider myself a child. When I was younger I had to wear it and did. And as stated, at this point its completely legal for me not to in my state.
Deal with it
Why is this a joke to you?
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Yet I do wear them.
sophie
Break My Heart
I'm 17, I wouldn't really consider myself a child. When I was younger I had to wear it and did. And as stated, at this point its completely legal for me not to in my state.
Deal with it
If you want to commit suicide, could you please do it in a manner which doesn't endanger everyone else around you? Isn't this like, paramount to your personal "libertarian" ideology?
Mr. Dictator
A Chain-Smoking Fox
GhostWriter16
Deity
Then the law should definitely be changed.
Yes, you're responsible for crashing into his car, but should not be responsible for his death, whether the law requies wearing a seatbelt or no.
Yeah because not wearing a seatbelt endangers everyone else to such a high degree... yeah so does driving a car, and that's allowed.
sophie
Break My Heart
It does. It really does.
Also I recommend you fasten your seatbelt up on that high horse of yours; you're liable to get knocked off it pretty soon here.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
Owen Glyndwr said:
Knocked off it and, in fact, right through a windshield.
So you want to abolish manslaughter charges?
In a way, it's a discouragement to do blindingly reckless things - the classic example being you mug an old man with a weak heart, and you hit him, he keels over and dies. You're then responsible for his death.
Core Imposter
Felon
- Joined
- May 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,351
You folks know how I feel about it.
Live free or die.
Live free or die.
