Originally posted by no1marauderYes, it seems to be about money rather than safety.
Many small localities in New York state receive a significant amount of their muncipal revenue from fines from traffic infractions, esp. those that border the New York State Thruway. This is a way to keep local taxes down and get revenue from non-local residents and is thus quite politically popular.
sigh,
My point has been lost.
😞
It's against the law, fine
If a cop spots you not wearing your seat belt, pull you over, give you a ticket, fine.
BUT going as far as posing as an undercover construction worker to nab seat belt offenders is insane! Do they not have better things they could be doing? Am I the only one who thinks this is crazy?
Originally posted by no1marauderAs far as I can tell, my post above has no implications regarding legislation. I was merely pointing out that the current state of affairs is such that when one is injured because one does not wear a seatbelt they are not the only one who is harmed. I have no problem with folk eating themselves to death or dying because they would prefer not to wear seatbelts, as long as my labor is not co-opted in order to finance dealing with the ramifications of such recklessness. Libertarianism cuts both ways.
Where's the limit to that logic, Bbarr? For example, it is a medical fact that people who are obese have enhanced health problems and thus can require more extensive use of taxpayer subsidized resources. Would a law saying that ...[text shortened]... ed by random checks of people's homes at meal times be OK by you?
Originally posted by mokkoYou're right, it was crazy. But what did you expect when you live north of nowhere? 😉
sigh,
My point has been lost.
😞
It's against the law, fine
If a cop spots you not wearing your seat belt, pull you over, give you a ticket, fine.
BUT going as far as posing as an undercover construction worker to nab seat belt ...[text shortened]... s they could be doing? Am I the only one who thinks this is crazy?
Originally posted by bbarrActually it doesn't. Society has no fundamental obligation to subsidize someone's medical care at all, whether for their reckless behavior or not. It does have a fundamental obligation to respect the natural freedom of man since that is what society is set up to do (you know that I am a Lockean). The fact that society MUST do the latter has no necessary implications at all for the former. You could make the same argument for your labor not being co-opted for the care of children with cancer or for the cost of "humanitarian" wars.
As far as I can tell, my post above has no implications regarding legislation. I was merely pointing out that the current state of affairs is such that when one is injured because one does not wear a seatbelt they are not the only one who is harmed. I have no problem with folk eating themselves to death or dying because they would prefer not to wear seatbelt ...[text shortened]... to finance dealing with the ramifications of such recklessness. Libertarianism cuts both ways.
Originally posted by no1marauderand what percentage of drivers stick rigedly to that 30 mph speed limit...or do you think that some may go over the limit. if you hit someone at 40 mph there is an 80% chance they will die whereas if you hit someone at 30mph there is an 80% chance they will love.
I live in a residential neighborhood which is heavily populated by college students. Last Wednesday I was walking to my local watering hole to shoot darts and there were two police cars and about 5 cops in the middle of the intersection of my street and the adjoining one. We are several blocks off two main throughfares, but the police officers we ...[text shortened]... traffic control device at virtually every corner and a 30 MPH speed limit is really a big deal.
fred
Isn't it as simple as - 'the law states that you must wear a seatbelt' (and as laws go it's one of the more sensible ones)? It doesn't matter if the police are dressed up as construction workers or wearing an invisibility cloak; you know the law and it's your choice if you choose to break it.
Whether the police engaged in this activity could be 'solving real crime' instead is debatable - at least they're out in the real world doing their stuff and not filling in forms at a desk.
Originally posted by Freddie2004Read my post in response to D43Mon. I'd say it's virtually impossible to go over 30 MPH in my neighborhood for any length of time because of the traffic and traffic control devices, but that wasn't my main point. If you want to make it so there's no possibility of someone being killed in a car crash, ban automobiles and get it over with.
and what percentage of drivers stick rigedly to that 30 mph speed limit...or do you think that some may go over the limit. if you hit someone at 40 mph there is an 80% chance they will die whereas if you hit someone at 30mph there is an 80% chance they will love.
fred
Originally posted by mokkoI agree with you 100%.
No, traffic offences should not be ignored. But a failure to comply with wearing your sealt belt is not harming anyone else but myself. And I'm not saying that I don't wear my seat bealt the majority of the time either. But to set up such an elabotare farce to catch these so called seat belt offenders is beyond ridiculous! This is time that could be better s ...[text shortened]... epidemic in traffic collisions then please let me know beacause as far as I'm aware it is not.
The facist state shouldn't be trying to change my behaviour at all, never mind when I'm doing noone but myself harm.
I think traffic wardens and police are scum. They serve the rich by forcing the rest of us to behave as they want us to. They condition us to obey.
"DON'T BREAK THE LAW..."
Don't smoke marijuana. Wear a seatbelt. Go off to die for us.
Originally posted by shavixmirSolution: Begin Operation Nuclear Holocaust.
I agree with you 100%.
The facist state shouldn't be trying to change my behaviour at all, never mind when I'm doing noone but myself harm.
I think traffic wardens and police are scum. They serve the rich by forcing the rest of us to behave as they want us to. They condition us to obey.
"DON'T BREAK THE LAW..."
Don't smoke marijuana. Wear a seatbelt. Go off to die for us.
-Fatty
Originally posted by shavixmirjust because you seem to get a parking ticket/speeding fine everyday of the week it doesn't mean that we all do! 😉
I agree with you 100%.
The facist state shouldn't be trying to change my behaviour at all, never mind when I'm doing noone but myself harm.
I think traffic wardens and police are scum. They serve the rich by forcing the rest of us to behave as they want us to. They condition us to obey.
"DON'T BREAK THE LAW..."
Don't smoke marijuana. Wear a seatbelt. Go off to die for us.
fred
More people die in auto accidents in the U.S. than by homicide.
People who do not wear their seatbelts have worse injuries and the fact is that quite frequently that cost is paid for by the taxpayer. Aside from the astronomically medical costs, unemployment, disabiltiy, public assistance if you end up not working.....YIKES!
If the entire police department is involved in checking that you are wearing your seatbelt.....that is a issue. A concentrated effort of a number of officers is valid. I bet they also checked for drunks, druggies, anyone with warrants, children in child seats, insurance and registration as well. Undercover tactics are valid as well......the presence of a police vehicle, or uniformned officer cause people to "moderate" their actions.
Are you aware that this is a government "by the people, for the people and of the people"? Don't like the law....change it! But, a lot of people worked hard to get those laws in place....some even wrote letters to their various representatives in government....
By the way....I am sorry you got a fine...what a pain! I know if you are anything like me....you could have spent that money 10 different ways besides the things you planned on.....Sincerely, I am sorry for that.
Originally posted by AynatThis government was set up to be a limited one with the purpose of protecting people's individual, fundamental rights. Thomas jefferson said: "The government that governs best, governs least". It is not a legitimate purpose of other people to compel you to do what they think is best for you, be they the local busybodies or the State legislature. The more police you have and the more discretionary power you grant them, the more of a police state you get. What we have today is very far from what the people who founded the country thought was necessary and proper.
More people die in auto accidents in the U.S. than by homicide.
People who do not wear their seatbelts have worse injuries and the fact is that quite frequently that cost is paid for by the taxpayer. Aside from the astronomically medical costs, unemployment, disabiltiy, public assistance if you end up not working.....YIKES!
If the entire police departme ...[text shortened]... at money 10 different ways besides the things you planned on.....Sincerely, I am sorry for that.
Originally posted by no1maraudercouldn't have said it better myself.
This government was set up to be a limited one with the purpose of protecting people's individual, fundamental rights. Thomas jefferson said: "The government that governs best, governs least". It is not a legitimate purpose of other people to compel you to do what they think is best for you, be they the local busybodies or the State legislatu ...[text shortened]... today is very far from what the people who founded the country thought was necessary and proper.
Typical response will be we the voters dictate the legislature but this does not always work out to be this way.
Plolitics is funny that way.
Money talks; freedom walks