Seat Belts, Health Care

[Apotheoun]

I am opposed to any type of federal seat belt laws, but the states - depending upon the specifics of their individual constitutions - may pass types of legislation that are beyond the competence of the federal government (see the 10th Amendment).

[Winchester]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='26 March 2010 - 01:53 PM' timestamp='1269626016' post='2080676']
I am opposed to any type of federal seat belt laws, but the states - depending upon the specifics of their individual constitutions - may pass types of legislation that are beyond the competence of the federal government (see the 10th Amendment).
[/quote]
On interstates they can make the rule.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 March 2010 - 11:55 AM' timestamp='1269626155' post='2080684']
On interstates they can make the rule.
[/quote]
I do not think that there should be interstate highways. The individual states should take control of them.

P.S. - As it is the highways are run by the states, and only funded by the federal government, but I do not even think that the funding of the highways is a federal issue.

Edited March 26, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Winchester]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='26 March 2010 - 01:57 PM' timestamp='1269626257' post='2080686']
I do not think that there should be interstate highways. The individual states should take control of them.

P.S. - As it is the highways are run by the states, and only funded by the federal government, but I do not even think that the funding of the highways is a federal issue.
[/quote]
It would be more efficient to have a Federal body running an interstate system.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='26 March 2010 - 01:25 PM' timestamp='1269624334' post='2080642']
Well without a seatbelt, I'm pretty sure my mother would have died about six years ago when she was rear-ended at a stop light. So........ I dunno. That's that, I guess. I think it's dumb not to wear one. Legality is another question, I suppose.
[/quote]
There are types of accidents where the seat belt actually becomes a hazard and many people are killed as a result of wearing their seat belt. But of course statistically speaking it is better to wear the seat belt and since the nanny state is so engaged in risk management on our behalf it makes sense that they'd enact "punishments" for making statistically inferior personal choices. I guess the police are supposed peek into your car as you're driving to make sure you have a belt on and if not, hold you in roadside captivity for five minutes while they inform you that the state demands a small portion of your monetary goods as punishment for your foul deed. The whole thing is really quite comical and doesn't even begin the address the real issues. There is evidence that seat belt laws actually increase driving speeds, tailgating and the like.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 March 2010 - 12:08 PM' timestamp='1269626900' post='2080700']
It would be more efficient to have a Federal body running an interstate system.
[/quote]
I do not agree, moreover I do not believe that the federal government has any role in creating intra-state / inter-state highways, and it is important to remember that the vast majority of the so-called interstate highway system is inside the states, and is truly only interstate at the state borders. As far as I am concerned, the federal government can control the crossing points between the states, but that is it. That is - of course - why the interstate highway system is maintained by state agencies (e.g., in California Caltrans constructs and maintains the highway system), and the work is not done by a federal construction agency, because were the federal government to usurp that responsibility it would be in violation of the 10th amendment.

I know that the federal government presently controls the money, but I am not for that either. The states should be in charge of the tax dollars, and should dole money out to the federal government, and not the other way around.

Edited March 26, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Winchester]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='26 March 2010 - 02:14 PM' timestamp='1269627241' post='2080704']


I know that the federal government presently controls the money, but I am not for that either. The states should be in charge of the tax dollars, and should dole money out to the federal government, and not the other way around.
[/quote]
I agree.

However, the interstate system is an interstate concern and as such would best be handled by the Fed, with monies coming from the states.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='26 March 2010 - 01:12 PM' timestamp='1269627145' post='2080703']
There are types of accidents where the seat belt actually becomes a hazard and many people are killed as a result of wearing their seat belt. But of course statistically speaking it is better to wear the seat belt and since the nanny state is so engaged in risk management on our behalf it makes sense that they'd enact "punishments" for making statistically inferior personal choices. I guess the police are supposed peek into your car as you're driving to make sure you have a belt on and if not, hold you in roadside captivity for five minutes while they inform you that the state demands a small portion of your monetary goods as punishment for your foul deed. The whole thing is really quite comical and doesn't even begin the address the real issues. There is evidence that seat belt laws actually increase driving speeds, tailgating and the like.
[/quote]
In my (admittedly limited) personal experience, police around here will pull you over, give you a warning if adults aren't belted, but give you a ticket if children aren't. What do you think about greater enforcement for children in the vehicle?

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Ed Normile' date='26 March 2010 - 09:29 AM' timestamp='1269620946' post='2080603']
Motorcyclists defeated the forced wearing of helmets and those who feel they would help them wear them and those who do not feel that way refuse to wear them, the way it should be in a free society.

ed
[/quote]

That should not have happened. there is not a chance in hell that not wearing a helmet is preferrable in ANY situation. and not wearing some kind of visor effectively blinds the motorcyclist at normal driving speeds, or severely limits his vision. that is super dangerous, trust me.


people who dont wear helmets on motorcycles deserve whatever comes to them, but they shouldnt be able to endanger other drivers like that.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 March 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1269629110' post='2080732']
However, the interstate system is an interstate concern and as such would best be handled by the Fed, with monies coming from the states.
[/quote]
It is both an interstate and intrastate concern, and the federal government would have charge over only the former aspect.

Edited March 26, 2010 by Apotheoun

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='26 March 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1269627145' post='2080703']
There is evidence that seat belt laws actually increase driving speeds, tailgating and the like.
[/quote]
Might be because people feel better able to control the vehicle in an emergency situation since they strapped in whereas someone not strapped in is too busy getting thrown into the dash. Compromised control of a vehicle in an emergency situation = Danger to others.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[color="#000000"][quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='26 March 2010 - 02:55 PM' timestamp='1269629716' post='2080739']
In my (admittedly limited) personal experience, police around here will pull you over, give you a warning if adults aren't belted, but give you a ticket if children aren't. What do you think about greater enforcement for children in the vehicle?
[/quote]
From a certain pov this makes perfect sense. The parents are being negligent and putting a child in danger therefore the police ought to "stick it to 'em." From my pov these laws are illegitimate in the first place and this scenario is unfortunate. I believe there are better ways to go about encouraging responsible behavior and that resulting to threats of punishment and the like are actually counter-productive in the long run and grant the state inappropriate "rights" over our behavior and private lives. Custom and cultural norms can be quite effective and are the true way in which 'good sense' is propagated. I don't believe that common sense and 'best practices' need to be codified into punitive law. Generally speaking, I think a parent who does not see the importance of buckling their children is suffering from ignorance rather than lack of incentives. The vast majority of parents are quite concerned with the safety and well-being of their children. I can just compare the cultural norms of today with what I remember from my childhood and there are many differences. Many examples can be taken from other cultures around the world as well. There is an element of relativism in the idea of negligence or excessive risk. The trailer for that "Babies" movie shows a family of four riding a motorcycle home from the hospital, no helmets, the older child sitting on the gas tank, and the youngest just an infant swaddled in the mother's arms. Hypothetically, future generations may find our very practice of driving to be insanely dangerous and absurd. Dense traffic, every Tom, D[color="#000000"]ick[/color] and Harry zipping around at ludicrous speeds, etc. Perhaps in the future computers will control all vehicles and the idea of people manually driving would be seen as extremely dangerous; maybe it is. I remember when I was a kid it wasn't that uncommon to see people riding in the backs of trucks, especially children. I can remember regularly riding in the back of a flatbed truck on the highway as part of one of my first jobs. I would have been considered a chicken and a wimp for being concerned about this, but I really wasn't, it was kind of fun. Now I believe that this was an unnecessary risk and I would probably object, but perhaps this means that our culture has become somewhat sissified and afraid? Probably to some extent, but perhaps also just more informed? But still, so many absurdities these days seem to be justified in the name of "safety." Insofar as costumed agents of the state are included in the supposed "solutions" to the supposed "problems" I'd say the fears are misguided. What we should be more concerned about is big brother. I believe that society can "fix" itself and solve its own problems without the domination of an all-authoritarian [i]State[/i]. I also believe that the place accorded to the [i]State[/i] these days weakens society's innate capacities.[/color]

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='kamiller42' date='26 March 2010 - 05:32 PM' timestamp='1269639158' post='2080894']
Might be because people feel better able to control the vehicle in an emergency situation since they strapped in whereas someone not strapped in is too busy getting thrown into the dash. Compromised control of a vehicle in an emergency situation = Danger to others.
[/quote]
Again, you've responded in a way impertinent to the point being made in the quoted text. I'm reinforced in my feeling that this debate is illegitimate.

As to your theory above, I believe it is classic risk compensation. Failing to wear a seat belt does not impose a real risk on others and your claims to the contrary are not even the basis of seat belt legislation. Also, the efficacy of seat belt laws is dubious. The appropriateness of seat belt laws is similarly dubious even if we were to grant some efficacy.

Btw, I just discovered John Adams.

[url="http://john-adams.co.uk/papers-reports/"]John Adams: Essays[/url]

[url="http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/SAE%20seatbelts.pdf"]The Efficacy of Seat Belt Legislation[/url]

[url="http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/failure%20of%20seatbelt%20legislation.pdf"]The Failure of Seat Belt Legislation[/url]


[i]"The myth that seat belt laws save lives is so deeply entrenched that I no longer entertain hopes of their repeal. But I still feel compelled from time to time, now in retirement, to challenge the selective use of evidence of those who perpetuate it...The balance of Harvey's and Durbin's evidence tilts strongly in favour of the conclusion that there has been no net life‐saving benefit attributable to the belt law – only a shift in the burden of risk from the best protected to the most vulnerable road users."[/i] [url="http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/letter-to-editor-of-significance.pdf"]Source[/url]

This debate is actually pushing me towards a more radical viewpoint.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='26 March 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1269639336' post='2080897']
The trailer for that "Babies" movie...[/quote]
Sorry, should have provided a link. I can't wait for this flick!!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vupEpNjCuY[/media]

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='26 March 2010 - 03:22 PM' timestamp='1269634977' post='2080831']
That should not have happened. there is not a chance in hell that not wearing a helmet is preferrable in ANY situation. and not wearing some kind of visor effectively blinds the motorcyclist at normal driving speeds, or severely limits his vision. that is super dangerous, trust me.


people who dont wear helmets on motorcycles deserve whatever comes to them, but they shouldnt be able to endanger other drivers like that.
[/quote]


Truth is that there are very few to no accidents on a motorcycle which are survivable. A helmet may help you if you came to a stop and your bike fell over, but outside of that the odd times a motorcyclist survives a crash he wishes he were dead. I had a good friend who went by the name "Doc" he was doing 15 miles an hour according to the cop who was behind him, he was preparing to turn left when an old lady pulled into him from the right without stopping. He lost his left arm and his right leg, had to have a bag strapped to his side to use the bathroom and lived miserably for almost five years. I seen a man stopped at a light during bike week in Daytona Fl., a drunk rammed him from behind doing maybe 20 miles an hour and bounced him into a telephone pole, he died on the way to the hospital. My cousin laid down his bike doing 30 miles an hour in Buckeye Lake Ohio when a camper pulled out in front of him, he went through four years of reconstructive surgery as the leathers he was wearing ground off him and his skin went too, he did not own a helmet and he slid without hitting his head, his legs, back and shoulders were not as lucky.

Edit> Oh , by the way, most bikes have windsheilds to keep you from being blinded by the wind or bugs that may hit your face and eyes.
ed

Edited March 27, 2010 by Ed Normile