DIYbanter - View Single Post

J. Clarke[_2_]

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:44:47 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 12/5/2012 11:59 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
...

Ditto seatbelts, helmet laws. There's no fukn safety safety concern for the
public in seatbelt laws....

Well, that isn't so, in reality, no.

There's a very big societal cost in the higher injury/death rates owing
to folks not being individually responsible-enough to use them. It's
kinda' like the class staying after school because of one somebody threw
a spitball...we all pay for the sins of the few.

That "logic" can be applied to any/all of our freedoms. You really do
want government to own you rather than the other way 'round.

This notion that seat belts or banning tobacco or restricting portion
sizes or the like can reduce the death rate is one of the stupidest
arguments I have ever seen. The death rate is constant--one person, one
death. Everybody dies. The question is not whether, it is when.

Seat belts do not save lives. They may prolong them, which is a
different issue. As to "cost", which costs more, to treat acute trauma
from an automobile accident or to treat Alzheimer's?