What abt Mt Best fridge?

[no spam]

You are correct that it is a waste of time, because you will lose the

LOL...Now we know you are off the rails. End of discussion

You know that he is correct. Why do we need laws? Its because there are
some out there who are not moral therefore there must be some kind of
punishment for doing 'bad' things. It is the fear of this punishment which
keeps many people from doing these 'bad' things. If you doubt this look at
what happens when this fear is removed. Looting after a disaster is a
perfect example.

There is none who is so blind as those who will not see.

 

[no spam]

All the laws are enforced, that means someone make sure they are followed,

That may be the way it's done in the US. Where I come from, the cops
are only allowed a person that is considdered to be very dangerous and
lifethreatening in a very strict sense. And they must be 99% sure that
the person is actualy armed. If the person is positively armed, and
alone in the hous, they will simply sit him out. If there are others
in tha house, they may have to attack if all other reasonable
solutions are tried.

This can only be laxed if it is a matter of national security(in a
physical sense) or under martial law.

Your logic fails because you are trying to go from the general to the
specific. If need arises even you nice government has the ability to use
any force it needs/wants to make sure its dictates/laws are followed.

A government uses what is called 'force escalation'. That means they use
the smallest force to get the people to comply. But it also means that if
one level of force does not work then they move up to the next level. The
first level is the threat of punishment, the last level is deadly force.
This the way all governments control the people.

 

[no spam]

would be done. You are just taking the matter to silly extremes, as do
Do you have a problem answering questions or do you just ignore question
that force you to admit you logic fails.

I say what I say and don't imply anything else. In the case of your hard
hat, if you are injured it will require the
services of your fellow workers who rush to your aid, leaving machines
untended and possibly risk their own lives
to save yours.

Talking about streaching to make a point. Again I ask you what else do you
want to government to prevent me from doing to keep something from POSSIBLY
impacting you. I can think of many things, climbing ladders. You might see
me fall and have to get out of you chair, wrap yourself in bubble wrap and
call for help. Riding motorcycles, you might have to dodge the wreckage
when someone crashes and this could cause you to spill your coffee in your
lap. Drinking coffee in a moving car, you migh get burned by spilled coffee
and lose control of your car and drive into a playground full of children.
PLAYGROUNDS!!! My Lord, look at the dangers there; swings, see-saws, running
children tripping and falling, out of control cars!!!!

All of which makes about as much sense as your 'they might have to leave
their machines' stuff.

Quit trying to imply I said anything of the sort. I said laws are enacted
to protect stupid people and the rest of
us from their actions.

I have news for you, they don't work because stupid people tend not to
follow such laws. I give you two examples; seatbelts and lawn mower deadman
switches.

What? What you've just stated is bassacwards

Yep, fingers moving faster than brain there but the question still needs to
be answered. Who are you to tell people what kind of car they must drive?

The free market initially had nothing to do with it, the American car
makers cried poor and said it couldn't be
done.

Of course the free market had nothing to do with it because the government
is controling things. As you pointed out you could buy cars with airbags
LONG before the government forced them upon the people. It just seemed
that people wanted to spend their money on other things. Which, as I keep
saying, should be their right.

That can be addressed by the dealer, my grandmother is four foot 9 and
they set her up in a car that fit her.
safely.

Good for her and a few years ago the government changed the law allowing
people to legally disconnect the airbags in their cars. But you seem to be
stuck on the small details and not seeing the big picture. What if the
government forces cars to be built to NASCAR Cup standards and the cheapest
car you can buy cost $100,000US? As I have pointed out this would save many
lives and cut the impact to your life.

Hum. . .I guess there are dozens of race car drivers dieing every year.
I guess big racing is just hiding that fact. The point still stand,
many
times a year a race car hits a concrete wall doing well over 100 mph
and
the driver climbs out of the car and walks away under his own power.
Do
a youtube search and I'm sure you can see some video of racing
accidents
that would have killed someone driving any car out there on the
commercial market. I guess its just fancy editing when they show the
driver walking away.



They die in crashes all the time, or are seriously injured, here you go:

Deaths in Grand-Am

* Jeff Clinton, Homestead-Miami, March 2002

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Winston Cup/Nextel Cup (since 1971)

* Friday Hassler, Daytona, February 1972
* Larry Smith, Talladega, May 1973
* Tiny Lund, Talladega, August 1975
* Ricky Knotts, Daytona, February 1980 (qualifying race)
* Bruce Jacobi, injuries suffered in a 1983 wreck at the 125-mile
qualifying races at Daytona (he would remain in a coma until he died in
1987)
* Terry Schoonover, Atlanta, November 1984
* Baldwin, Rick, injured during qualifying attempt at Michigan in
1986,
succumbing in 1997.
* Grant Adcox, Atlanta, November 1989
* J. D. McDuffie, Watkins Glen, August 1991
* Neil Bonnett, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
* Rodney Orr, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
* Kenny Irwin, Loudon, July 2000 (in practice)
* Dale Earnhardt, Daytona, February 2001, Daytona 500

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Busch Series (since 1982)

* Clifford Allison, Michigan, 1992 (in practice)
* Adam Petty, Loudon, 2000 (in practice)

I don't know about how the other NASCAR cars are equipped so I only
counted the Cup and Bush series. Using your own numbers in the past 30
(THIRTY) years there has been a total of 13 deaths. (FYI, in 2003 there
were 417 people killed falling from ladders. That's about 3208% more.)
In the last 30 years how many drivers, I won't even include passengers,
have been killed in cars that are traveling much slower who could have
lived if the government had required all cars to be built to protect the
drivers like NASCAR requires their cars to be built?

Two points. One, if you want the government to protect you and those
around you should not they protect you to the utmost? Two, who gets to
decided what is the right thing?

Can't come up with a counter argument for this?

No, you are deliberately avoid my cites that back up what I say. If you
don't buckle up you are stupid, a
hazard to everyone else in the car and those outside.

You give cites of how not buckling up is a danger for the person not buckled
up you have yet to give a cite showing how many accidents are CAUSED by
people not buckling up AND injure others. Can you come up with 5 accidents
in the past 30 years where an unbuckled person was the cause of a fatal
accident?

If you can not then will you admit that there no REASONABLE risk to anyone
other than the individual who made a free choice to not buckle his seatbelt?

It just backs up what I've be saying all along, the stupid are a hazard to
those around them. Stats prove beyond
any doubt that people who don't buckle up are a hazard to everyone else in
the car and those outside, as are

How, how, HOW! I have NEVER read an accident report which cites the cause
of the accident being the lack of seatbelt usage. I haven't even seen it
listed as a contributing factor. Can you give me one (1) accident where
this has happened?

Also you like to use reasonable risk as your reason. Just what is a
reasonable risk? The risk of 1 person in 100,000 dieing? 1 in 500,000? 1
in 1,000,000?

 

[Balanced View]

WARNING LOGIC ERROR!!

Taking as a given that "50% of all highway deaths are because the occupant
of the car was not buckled up" you can not say that all of those people
would have survived if they had been wearing a seatbelt.

LOL. Yes, according to the researchers that is the case. What part of
"50% are dead because they were not buckled up"
do you not understand?

 

[Balanced View]

You know that he is correct. Why do we need laws? Its because there are
some out there who are not moral therefore there must be some kind of
punishment for doing 'bad' things. It is the fear of this punishment which
keeps many people from doing these 'bad' things. If you doubt this look at
what happens when this fear is removed. Looting after a disaster is a
perfect example.

There is none who is so blind as those who will not see.

What have I been saying all along? " Laws are made for stupid people".
Even stupid people know laws have
consequences, but the punishment is made to fit the severity of the
crime. Nobody is going to shoot you for
not wearing a seatbelt, or not curbing your dog.

 

[Balanced View]

snipped

Talking about streaching to make a point. Again I ask you what else do you
want to government to prevent me from doing to keep something from POSSIBLY
impacting you. I can think of many things, climbing ladders. You might see
me fall and have to get out of you chair, wrap yourself in bubble wrap and
call for help. Riding motorcycles, you might have to dodge the wreckage
when someone crashes and this could cause you to spill your coffee in your
lap. Drinking coffee in a moving car, you migh get burned by spilled coffee
and lose control of your car and drive into a playground full of children.
PLAYGROUNDS!!! My Lord, look at the dangers there; swings, see-saws, running
children tripping and falling, out of control cars!!!!

All of which makes about as much sense as your 'they might have to leave
their machines' stuff.

Having been on construction job sites more than once with coworkers who
injured themselves and had to be either
rushed to hospital or extricated from dangerous places by other workers
because of they were:

A. Using equipment not meant for the job
B. Injured and had to be extricated from dangerous position because they
were not using safety belts, hard hats, foot gear etc.

Yeah it happens a lot, which is why Insurance is so high for
construction workers.

I have news for you, they don't work because stupid people tend not to
follow such laws. I give you two examples; seatbelts and lawn mower deadman
switches.

Stats show most of them do, seat belt use has gone from almost nil to
80% since the laws were enacted

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/seatbeltuse.htm

“It’s no coincidence that because 8 out of 10 Americans are wearing
their safety belts, we have also achieved
the lowest traffic fatality rate on our Nation’s highways since
record-keeping began 29 years ago,” Mineta said.

Today’s traffic fatality rate is 1.48 fatalities per 100 million vehicle
miles traveled, a dramatic reduction since
1975 when the rate was 3.35 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles
traveled."

Yep, fingers moving faster than brain there but the question still needs to
be answered. Who are you to tell people what kind of car they must drive?

Again, I'm not telling them anything, if they are smart they will drive
the safest car they can afford. If they are stupid,
then they will win the Darwin award, along with people who drive on thin
lake ice and gold during thunderstorms.

Of course the free market had nothing to do with it because the government
is controling things. As you pointed out you could buy cars with airbags
LONG before the government forced them upon the people. It just seemed
that people wanted to spend their money on other things. Which, as I keep
saying, should be their right.

Not Airbags. Seat belts, racing harness, roll bars, fire suppression.
None of which was readily available
to the average person. Nor was there much information available
regarding deaths prevented by seat belt
use for the average person to make a educated decision back then.

Good for her and a few years ago the government changed the law allowing
people to legally disconnect the airbags in their cars. But you seem to be
stuck on the small details and not seeing the big picture. What if the
government forces cars to be built to NASCAR Cup standards and the cheapest
car you can buy cost $100,000US? As I have pointed out this would save many
lives and cut the impact to your life.

LOL, more extremism. For one thing Nascar cup standards would not pass
current regulations for road cars.

Hum. . .I guess there are dozens of race car drivers dieing every year.
I guess big racing is just hiding that fact. The point still stand,
many
times a year a race car hits a concrete wall doing well over 100 mph
and
the driver climbs out of the car and walks away under his own power.
Do
a youtube search and I'm sure you can see some video of racing
accidents
that would have killed someone driving any car out there on the
commercial market. I guess its just fancy editing when they show the
driver walking away.




They die in crashes all the time, or are seriously injured, here you go:

Deaths in Grand-Am

* Jeff Clinton, Homestead-Miami, March 2002

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Winston Cup/Nextel Cup (since 1971)

* Friday Hassler, Daytona, February 1972
* Larry Smith, Talladega, May 1973
* Tiny Lund, Talladega, August 1975
* Ricky Knotts, Daytona, February 1980 (qualifying race)
* Bruce Jacobi, injuries suffered in a 1983 wreck at the 125-mile
qualifying races at Daytona (he would remain in a coma until he died in
1987)
* Terry Schoonover, Atlanta, November 1984
* Baldwin, Rick, injured during qualifying attempt at Michigan in
1986,
succumbing in 1997.
* Grant Adcox, Atlanta, November 1989
* J. D. McDuffie, Watkins Glen, August 1991
* Neil Bonnett, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
* Rodney Orr, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
* Kenny Irwin, Loudon, July 2000 (in practice)
* Dale Earnhardt, Daytona, February 2001, Daytona 500

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Busch Series (since 1982)

* Clifford Allison, Michigan, 1992 (in practice)
* Adam Petty, Loudon, 2000 (in practice)


I don't know about how the other NASCAR cars are equipped so I only
counted the Cup and Bush series. Using your own numbers in the past 30
(THIRTY) years there has been a total of 13 deaths. (FYI, in 2003 there
were 417 people killed falling from ladders. That's about 3208% more.)
In the last 30 years how many drivers, I won't even include passengers,
have been killed in cars that are traveling much slower who could have
lived if the government had required all cars to be built to protect the
drivers like NASCAR requires their cars to be built?

Two points. One, if you want the government to protect you and those
around you should not they protect you to the utmost? Two, who gets to
decided what is the right thing?

Can't come up with a counter argument for this?

13 deaths and many life threatening injuries that are not listed. Nascar
is nothing like day to day traffic,
in Nascar you have some of the best drivers in the world, all going in
one direction with road marshalls
watching for infractions of the rules, oil & debris in about 40 races a
year.

You give cites of how not buckling up is a danger for the person not buckled
up you have yet to give a cite showing how many accidents are CAUSED by
people not buckling up AND injure others. Can you come up with 5 accidents
in the past 30 years where an unbuckled person was the cause of a fatal
accident?

If you can not then will you admit that there no REASONABLE risk to anyone
other than the individual who made a free choice to not buckle his seatbelt?

http://www.wa.gov/wtsc/programs/seatbelt2.htm

"Belted People Don't Kill Other People:

A study conducted at the University of Tokyo examined 100,000 collisions
involving front and rear passengers.
The study found that drivers who are buckled up have five times the risk
of dying in a collision if their rear seat
passengers are not buckled up. The injuries to the driver and front seat
passenger are caused when the people
in the back who are not buckled up catapult to the front. The force of
this human body flying into the front seat
is calculated to be 3.5 tons for a 30-mile per hour crash. The study
found that 80% of the deaths from the crashes
could have been eliminated if the rear seat occupants had been buckled
up. The study results were recently published
in The Lancet".

1.

2. Fatal MTA Bus Accident -- July 27, 2007
<

>
The* driver* of a MTA Metro Bus was* ejected* from his bus and then run
over by the bus after being braodsided by a Lincolin Navigator SUV. The
SUV The driver of a MTA Metro Bus was ejected from his bus and then run
over by the bus after being braodsided by
a Lincolin Navigator SUV. The SUV ran a red light on the corner of
Williamington & 120th Street in unincorporated
Los Angeles. The driver of the bus died at the scene. The driver of the
SUV was transported in critical condition

3. Crash on icy I-80 fatal to OP woman
http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_scene/2006/12/26/index.html

A 32-year-old Overland Park woman wearing her lap belt but not shoulder
belt was thrown from her 2002 Ford
Explorer and killed when it overturned on icy I-80 in Wyoming Saturday,
police said. A 7-year-old girl passenger
was treated and released.

Update: The Wyoming Highway Patrol tells me the victim, Tonice S.
Joseph, slid out of her lap belt when the
vehicle overturned. She was thrown into the oncoming traffic lane and
struck the passenger-side windshield of a
state snowplow. The child was partly pinned under the Ford Explorer,
troopers said. That's the extent of the
report; the investigating trooper is off today.

4. http://www.usatoday.com/money/consumer/autos/mauto974.htm

"Query's husband of three years died instantly after the tread peeled
off his Firestone tire, his Explorer rolled
three times, and he was thrown out of the vehicle and into oncoming
traffic".

5. http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1528800/20060417/proof_of_d_12.jhtml

Ashanti pulled out of a planned concert in Johannesburg, South Africa,
on Saturday after her cousin was killed by a drunk
driver while running an errand for the singer before the show. According
to the Cape Times Web site, 20-year-old Quinshae
Snead was thrown into oncoming traffic from a car in which she was a
passenger after it was struck by an unlicensed
17-year-old drunk driver who had stolen his mother's car.


6.
http://www.silive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/115020455968410.xml&coll=1

Danielle Ricco, a classmate of Miss Sallustio at Pace University and one
of her close friends, was killed in the crash after
being ejected from the cab's front passenger seat and thrown into the
path of another taxi going in the opposite direction.

7.http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20070403/ai_n18786106

Police have released the identity of a Clearfield man killed Monday
night after he was thrown from a rolling vehicle and hit
by oncoming traffic.

8. http://www.poormojo.org/pmjadaily/archives/008429.php

SEMINOLE COUNTY, Fla. -- A driver of a sport utility vehicle that
flipped nearly 12 times on Interstate 4 was cut
in half after he was launched into the air and landed in the windshield
of a moving SUV, according to Local 6 News.


9. http://www.safeprogram.com/jessica.htm

"Within the past month I lost someone close to the family. Her name was
Katie Marchetti. Her and my cousin AJ
were driving home from an engagment party. They did not drink. In fact,
they left the party early because they
were tired and wanted to go home. AJ was driving and Katie was in the
passenger seat. On the way home AJ fell
asleep at the wheel, and collided with the gaurdrail. AJ was wearing his
seatbelt and had minor cuts and bruises...
Katie was not. She was ejected from the car into oncoming traffic. She
was then hit by another car. She did not
survive. "

10.http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:gG9Mvx087bMJ:timesnewsweekly.com/Archives
2004/Jul.-Sept.2004/090904/NewFiles/TEEN%2520DIES.html+ejected+into+oncoming+traffic
&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=97&gl=ca

"A Howard Beach teenager died after the auto she was riding in flipped
and ejected her into oncoming traffic on the Belt Parkway on Sunday."

How, how, HOW! I have NEVER read an accident report which cites the cause
of the accident being the lack of seatbelt usage. I haven't even seen it
listed as a contributing factor. Can you give me one (1) accident where
this has happened?

Also you like to use reasonable risk as your reason. Just what is a
reasonable risk? The risk of 1 person in 100,000 dieing? 1 in 500,000? 1
in 1,000,000?

 

[no spam]

LOL. Yes, according to the researchers that is the case. What part of "50%
are dead because they were not buckled up"
do you not understand?

Oops, I was the one reading too fast this time.

 

[no spam]

You are correct that it is a waste of time, because you will lose the

What have I been saying all along? " Laws are made for stupid people".
Even stupid people know laws have
consequences, but the punishment is made to fit the severity of the crime.
Nobody is going to shoot you for
not wearing a seatbelt, or not curbing your dog.

Not directly and not yet. History shows that the more power a government
gets the more it wants. There's a national news story about a guy facing
jail time because he failed to get the proper permits to "build a fence, a
retaining wall, a patio and a few concrete columns to decorate his driveway"

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9406861.html

Who would have thought that could have happened 15 years ago?

Again I as you to look around you and see how far things have gone in the
last 10 years.

 

[no spam]

My point still is where does the government get the right to tell
I moved this to the top because you seem to keep missing it in the body of
the msg and I really would like you to answer it. BTW, I cut it out of the
msg to make the msg a little shorter.

Having been on construction job sites more than once with coworkers who
injured themselves and had to be either
rushed to hospital or extricated from dangerous places by other workers
because of they were:

A. Using equipment not meant for the job
B. Injured and had to be extricated from dangerous position because they
were not using safety belts, hard hats, foot gear etc.

Yeah it happens a lot, which is why Insurance is so high for
construction workers.

That's part of my point. Why should insurance pay for someone being stupid
unless you have a stupid clause? If you are hurt because of your own
actions then you should pay for it, both physically and financially.
Insurance should only pay if you are hurt by a true accident or by another's
actions. In case of the former the insuracne company should should be
allowed to sue the stupid person to recover its money.

Stats show most of them do, seat belt use has gone from almost nil to
80% since the laws were enacted

Could that be because people are afraid not to wear them? There are several
reports out there that show most people over pay their income tax. Is this
because they thing they should help the government out or is it because they
are afraid of what the government might do to them if they make a mistake?

You put the force of government behind almost anything you can get 80% of
the people to do it.

Again, I'm not telling them anything, if they are smart they will drive
the safest car they can afford. If they are stupid,
then they will win the Darwin award, along with people who drive on thin
lake ice and gold during thunderstorms.

Not directly but the government is and you support the government doing it.

Not Airbags. Seat belts, racing harness, roll bars, fire suppression.
None of which was readily available
to the average person. Nor was there much information available
regarding deaths prevented by seat belt
use for the average person to make a educated decision back then.

So instead of the government educating the people to allow them to make an
informed decision it decided what was the best for them and forced it upon
them. Does that sum it up? Ever wonder what the government will decide is
best for you in the future?

LOL, more extremism. For one thing Nascar cup standards would not pass
current regulations for road cars.

Not as built but every safety system in them could be built into a road car
fairly simply. It would be very little problem to add self sealing fuel
tanks, roll cages, fire suppression systems, 6 point harnesses, racing style
seats, fuel pump disconnects (one of my cars already has this), Lexan
windshields and many other things to almost any car in production in the US
today. A few design changes would be required for some things but think how
many lives could be saved.

13 deaths and many life threatening injuries that are not listed. Nascar
is nothing like day to day traffic,
in Nascar you have some of the best drivers in the world, all going in
one direction with road marshalls
watching for infractions of the rules, oil & debris in about 40 races a
year.

Still not an answer to the questions posed. Anyway what does all that have
to do with the fact that they are going 150+ mph when they crash and almost
all of them not only live but walk away on their own two feet. Even with
the small number of drivers in NASCAR the number is statistically tiny.

A study conducted at the University of Tokyo examined 100,000 collisions
involving front and rear passengers.
The study found that drivers who are buckled up have five times the risk
of dying in a collision if their rear seat
passengers are not buckled up. The injuries to the driver and front seat

Nice try but the accidents mentioned are not caused by anyone being
unbelted. The deaths are but again its the driver's choice to drive before
everyone is buckled in. I once spent 15 minutes sitting in the Wal Mart
parking lot because my dad refused to buckle up. Ticked him off but he got
over it.

The* driver* of a MTA Metro Bus was* ejected* from his bus and then run

Los Angeles. The driver of the bus died at the scene. The driver of the
SUV was transported in critical condition

Ooooo, so close. Critial condition not dead.

3. Crash on icy I-80 fatal to OP woman

A 32-year-old Overland Park woman wearing her lap belt but not shoulder
belt was thrown from her 2002 Ford
Explorer and killed when it overturned on icy I-80 in Wyoming Saturday,
police said. A 7-year-old girl passenger
was treated and released.

No accident caused.

"Query's husband of three years died instantly after the tread peeled
off his Firestone tire, his Explorer rolled
three times, and he was thrown out of the vehicle and into oncoming
traffic".

No again

Ashanti pulled out of a planned concert in Johannesburg, South Africa,
on Saturday after her cousin was killed by a drunk
driver while running an errand for the singer before the show. According
to the Cape Times Web site, 20-year-old Quinshae
Snead was thrown into oncoming traffic from a car in which she was a
passenger after it was struck by an unlicensed
17-year-old drunk driver who had stolen his mother's car.

Again the person killed was the one unbuckled and was the fatal accident not
the cause.

Danielle Ricco, a classmate of Miss Sallustio at Pace University and one
of her close friends, was killed in the crash after
being ejected from the cab's front passenger seat and thrown into the
path of another taxi going in the opposite direction.
Ditto.


Police have released the identity of a Clearfield man killed Monday
night after he was thrown from a rolling vehicle and hit
by oncoming traffic.
Ditto.


SEMINOLE COUNTY, Fla. -- A driver of a sport utility vehicle that
flipped nearly 12 times on Interstate 4 was cut
in half after he was launched into the air and landed in the windshield
of a moving SUV, according to Local 6 News.
Ditto.


asleep at the wheel, and collided with the gaurdrail. AJ was wearing his
seatbelt and had minor cuts and bruises...
Katie was not. She was ejected from the car into oncoming traffic. She
was then hit by another car. She did not
survive. "
Ditto.


"A Howard Beach teenager died after the auto she was riding in flipped
and ejected her into oncoming traffic on the Belt Parkway on Sunday."

Ditto.

Nice try but you faild. None of your examples fit the criteria I set.
Notice that I specifically stated that the unbelted person had to be the
cause of a fatal accident NOT be part of a fatal accident.

In each and every case the person who died did so because they made a risky
and stupid choice. People should have the right to make such choices, just
because you don't and don't think they should is no reason to force them to
do what you think is best.


All of your cites have shown that the lack of seatbelt usage has made
accidents worse but none of them show that an accident was CAUSED by someone
not wearing their seatbelt.


Also you like to use reasonable risk as your reason. Just what is a
reasonable risk? The risk of 1 person in 100,000 dieing? 1 in 500,000? 1
in 1,000,000?

 

[Balanced View]

Not directly and not yet. History shows that the more power a government
gets the more it wants. There's a national news story about a guy facing
jail time because he failed to get the proper permits to "build a fence, a
retaining wall, a patio and a few concrete columns to decorate his driveway"

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9406861.html

Who would have thought that could have happened 15 years ago?

Again I as you to look around you and see how far things have gone in the
last 10 years.

Didn't you read the hole story? He refused to get permits and was given
six months to do so, plus upon inspecting
his property they found "found eight other violations, including a lack
of permits for plumbing and grading".
If he had got a building permit for all of his work nothing would have
happened to him.

 

[Balanced View]

I moved this to the top because you seem to keep missing it in the body of
the msg and I really would like you to answer it. BTW, I cut it out of the
msg to make the msg a little shorter.




That's part of my point. Why should insurance pay for someone being stupid
unless you have a stupid clause? If you are hurt because of your own
actions then you should pay for it, both physically and financially.
Insurance should only pay if you are hurt by a true accident or by another's
actions. In case of the former the insuracne company should should be
allowed to sue the stupid person to recover its money.




Could that be because people are afraid not to wear them? There are several
reports out there that show most people over pay their income tax. Is this
because they thing they should help the government out or is it because they
are afraid of what the government might do to them if they make a mistake?

You put the force of government behind almost anything you can get 80% of
the people to do it.




Not directly but the government is and you support the government doing it.




So instead of the government educating the people to allow them to make an
informed decision it decided what was the best for them and forced it upon
them. Does that sum it up? Ever wonder what the government will decide is
best for you in the future?




Not as built but every safety system in them could be built into a road car
fairly simply. It would be very little problem to add self sealing fuel
tanks, roll cages, fire suppression systems, 6 point harnesses, racing style
seats, fuel pump disconnects (one of my cars already has this), Lexan
windshields and many other things to almost any car in production in the US
today. A few design changes would be required for some things but think how
many lives could be saved.




Still not an answer to the questions posed. Anyway what does all that have
to do with the fact that they are going 150+ mph when they crash and almost
all of them not only live but walk away on their own two feet. Even with
the small number of drivers in NASCAR the number is statistically tiny.




Nice try but the accidents mentioned are not caused by anyone being
unbelted. The deaths are but again its the driver's choice to drive before
everyone is buckled in. I once spent 15 minutes sitting in the Wal Mart
parking lot because my dad refused to buckle up. Ticked him off but he got
over it.

Can't you read? " *_The study found that drivers who are buckled up have
five times the risk of
dying in a collision _*_*if their rear seat passengers are not buckled up*_

Ooooo, so close. Critial condition not dead.
The bus driver died



No accident caused.

Yes it did, she struck a snowplow causing a second accident

No again

He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Again the person killed was the one unbuckled and was the fatal accident not
the cause.

What? She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Ditto.

She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident
He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accidentHe was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Ditto.

She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Nice try but you faild. None of your examples fit the criteria I set.
Notice that I specifically stated that the unbelted person had to be the
cause of a fatal accident NOT be part of a fatal accident.

They were, they were not wearing seatbelts and died as a result of being
thrown into oncoming traffic.
That is a fatal accident according to the police.

In each and every case the person who died did so because they made a risky
and stupid choice. People should have the right to make such choices, just
because you don't and don't think they should is no reason to force them to
do what you think is best.

I think you have a problem with comprehension, all I have ever claimed
was that laws are made to protect
stupid people and the rest of us from their actions. It is not about
"what I think is best" or what I think the
government should do.

All of your cites have shown that the lack of seatbelt usage has made
accidents worse but none of them show that an accident was CAUSED by someone
not wearing their seatbelt.

Now you are just being ridiculous. It's not an fatal accident until it
someone is killed, up until then it is just an accident,
the death occurs because the seat belt is not worn. The seat belt does
not cause the car to swerve on a patch of ice,
force a driver to drink before they drive, or make them apply makeup
while driving.

Also you like to use reasonable risk as your reason. Just what is a
reasonable risk? The risk of 1 person in 100,000 dieing? 1 in 500,000? 1
in 1,000,000?

You truly have your head in the sand, I have already posted reams of
cites and quotes pointing out how one law
regarding seat belts has saved thousands of lives, and how not wearing
one dramatically increases your risk of killing
yourself and those riding in the car with you.

What I feel is a reasonable risk has nothing to do with it, do a study
and do the math yourself and determine what
level of risk the government feels is acceptable. Personally I always
buckle up, don't walk under ladders and always
wear protective gear when working. You can do what ever you like, and
think about how well you exercised your rights
( God forbid it should happen) in the ICU or emergency room some day.

 

[no spam]

You are correct that it is a waste of time, because you will lose the

Didn't you read the hole story? He refused to get permits and was given
six months to do so, plus upon inspecting
his property they found "found eight other violations, including a lack of
permits for plumbing and grading".
If he had got a building permit for all of his work nothing would have
happened to him.

Which is part of my point about government, its need to control and its use
of force

 

[Vaughn Simon]

Not directly and not yet. History shows that the more power a government gets
the more it wants. There's a national news story about a guy facing jail time
because he failed to get the proper permits to "build a fence, a retaining
wall, a patio and a few concrete columns to decorate his driveway"

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9406861.html

Who would have thought that could have happened 15 years ago?

I don't know what you think has changed over the last 15 years, but I think
you are wrong. I have been a homeowner for perhaps 35 years, and I can tell you
that the above could have happened for at least that long in some jurisdictions.

In some areas, Building & Zoning regulations have real teeth and are
mercilessly enforced, and in other areas they are virtually nonexistent.

It just depends.

Again I as you to look around you and see how far things have gone in the last
10 years.

I don't see any great change.

Vaughn

 

[Vaughn Simon]

Your freedom stops where it rubs against my freedom.

Allow me to play the devil's advocate: Many of our actions have externalities
that can impact others, or at least impact society as a whole. When a person
does something stupid and dangerous such as driving a motorcycle without a
helmet and then ends up as a long-term zombie taking a bed in a medical
facility, it is our society (not the idiot) who ends up paying the bill. Even
in the unlikely event the zombie has sufficient insurance, he has succeeded in
raising premiums for the rest of us.

Let me give you a personal example of the power of the state: When I was a
child, "they" came to the door of our home, took my mother away by force, and
locked her up in a state institution for the rest of her life. She was not
charged with any crime, she had not done anything to anybody, but they took her
away and locked her up. From that day, I only saw her from a distance, and
finally in a casket. Terrible huh?

It *was* terrible at the time, but looking back with the distance and the
acquired wisdom of a few decades I can finally see things a bit differently. As
it turns out, "they" were absolutely right to remove my mother from my family
and from our church and friends. She had TB, there was then no cure for TB, and
her and my father were in denial. By "their" action, "they" protected others
from getting that same incurable disease.

If we had done the same for the first few AIDS patients, thousands of folks
would still be alive today and society would have saved billions in treatment
costs. However, as a society we are now willing to pay the price of having
people spread dread diseases in the name of freedom and privacy. Are we doing
the right thing?

Vaughn

 

[Balanced View]

Which is part of my point about government, its need to control and its use
of force

It needs to control stupid people from endangering the rest of us.

 

[no spam]

To make sure you see it I'm cutting everything but this part.

 

[no spam]

Having been on construction job sites more than once with coworkers who
Don't you have an answer for this either?


No comment on this either I see.

Can't you read? " *_The study found that drivers who are buckled up have
five times the risk of
dying in a collision _*_*if their rear seat passengers are not buckled
up*_

Ok but just how is thing going to cause a fatal accident? It may kill
someone in THAT accident.

The* driver* of a MTA Metro Bus was* ejected* from his bus and then run
The bus driver died

BUT HE WAS THE ONE EJECTED IN THE ACCIDENT. He was not killed because
someone else was ejected. IOW, being ejected did not CAUSE (look up the
word if you don't understand) a fatal accident he was in one.

Yes it did, she struck a snowplow causing a second accident

Oops, I left out the word "fatal"

He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Please note I specifically said fatal accident. I'll quote for you: "Can
you come up with 5 accidents in the past 30 years where an unbuckled person
was the cause of a fatal accident?"

What? She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second
accident

As I have pointed out, I said cased a fatal accident. I'm sure I could come
up with some accidents where ladders falling off a truck have caused
accidents should be ban ladders?

She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Non-fatal accident.

He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

See above.

He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident
Ditto.


She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

See above.

They were, they were not wearing seatbelts and died as a result of being
thrown into oncoming traffic.
That is a fatal accident according to the police.

Let me try to explain it to you. I know that not wearing a seatbelt can
cause you to be tossed from a car and becoming part of the debris from your
accident and increase the odds of a secondary accident. But the same thing
can be said about cargo being carried and parts of the car which have broken
free in an accident. Point one, the odds of it happening are very, very
small. The odds of causing a secondary accident that is fatal to a second
party is so small I'm not sure how you'd figure them. Point two, with such
small odds trying to claim a law forcing everyone to wear a seatbelt is to
protect other drivers from being killed by flying bodies is ludicrous.

I think you have a problem with comprehension, all I have ever claimed was
that laws are made to protect
stupid people and the rest of us from their actions. It is not about "what
I think is best" or what I think the
government should do.

My major point is why should the government trample the rights of all the
people to make choices to protect a few stupid people? I think people have
the right to be stupid and you have NO right to tell people what to do.
BTW, I didn't know that you lived in a dictatorship where the government had
total control over you and your life and you had no say in governmental
policy. I guess that's why you don't comprehend individuals having rights.

Now you are just being ridiculous. It's not an fatal accident until it
someone is killed, up until then it is just an accident,
the death occurs because the seat belt is not worn. The seat belt does not
cause the car to swerve on a patch of ice,
force a driver to drink before they drive, or make them apply makeup while
driving.

Let me explain. To be a causal factor of an accident the object must be a
link in the chain of events the accident which is at the front of the chain
AND its removal would prevent the accident. Example of a seatbelt being a
casual factor of a fatal accident. Car his black ice. Driver over corrects
and loses control. Car rolls over. Driver ejected. Body sails through
air. While in air body hits second car. Body flys through windshield of
second car. Body kill driver of second car. One of the causal factors in
the second accident is the lack of seatbelt use.

You truly have your head in the sand, I have already posted reams of cites
and quotes pointing out how one law
regarding seat belts has saved thousands of lives, and how not wearing one
dramatically increases your risk of killing
yourself and those riding in the car with you.

Do you have a problem answering questions put to you? I asked you a simple
question. Please re-read it and try answering it. Is this within your
ability?

Why do you 1) care if I do something stupid and die? 2) Have the right to
contol my life and how I live it?

What I feel is a reasonable risk has nothing to do with it, do a study
and do the math yourself and determine what
level of risk the government feels is acceptable. Personally I always
buckle up, don't walk under ladders and always

Good for you, so do I.

wear protective gear when working. You can do what ever you like, and

Not legally I can't. I can't drive in any state in the union without
wearing a seatbelt. IIRC, I can not legally install a toilet that uses more
than, I think, 1.5 gallons of water. I can not install a 'high flow' shower
head. In my current locale I can not install my own mobile home. I can not
have an entry way to a mobil home without a platform smaller then 40" X 40"
if that mobile home is more than 24" off the ground.

think about how well you exercised your rights
( God forbid it should happen) in the ICU or emergency room some day.

To tell you the truth if you do something stupid and wind up in the ER, ICU
or morgue it won't bother me at all.

 

[no spam]

My point still is where does the government get the right to tell

Your freedom stops where it rubs against my freedom.

Allow me to play the devil's advocate: Many of our actions have
externalities that can impact others, or at least impact society as a
whole. When a person does something stupid and dangerous such as driving
a motorcycle without a helmet and then ends up as a long-term zombie
taking a bed in a medical facility, it is our society (not the idiot) who
ends up paying the bill. Even in the unlikely event the zombie has
sufficient insurance, he has succeeded in raising premiums for the rest of
us.

Let me give you a personal example of the power of the state: When I was
a child, "they" came to the door of our home, took my mother away by
force, and locked her up in a state institution for the rest of her life.
She was not charged with any crime, she had not done anything to anybody,
but they took her away and locked her up. From that day, I only saw her
from a distance, and finally in a casket. Terrible huh?

It *was* terrible at the time, but looking back with the distance and the
acquired wisdom of a few decades I can finally see things a bit
differently. As it turns out, "they" were absolutely right to remove my
mother from my family and from our church and friends. She had TB, there
was then no cure for TB, and her and my father were in denial. By "their"
action, "they" protected others from getting that same incurable disease.

If we had done the same for the first few AIDS patients, thousands of
folks would still be alive today and society would have saved billions in
treatment costs. However, as a society we are now willing to pay the
price of having people spread dread diseases in the name of freedom and
privacy. Are we doing the right thing

That's like comparing oranges to horse apples. You are talking about a
person being a known threat to not only those around them but society as a
whole. I'm talking about an individual doing something that has very, very
small odds of causing harm to anyone other than himself.

 

[no spam]

Not directly and not yet. History shows that the more power a

It needs to control stupid people from endangering the rest of us.

How? By forcing all of us to do something that reduces a danger from stupid
people which is statistically insignificant?

 

[Vaughn Simon]

I'm talking about an individual doing something that has very, very small
odds of causing harm to anyone other than himself.

You seem to have missed the below part:

Vaughn