The chances of that happening are so astronomically low as to be practically impossible, and it doesn’t hold a candle to the violation of personal liberty.
personal liberty includes children’s right to have a parent alive and well for as long as possible even if they’re too stupid to take measures against risk of an accident.
all laws are limits on personal liberty. that alone isn’t a good argument against any law.
also if you’re gonna say the risk of something is astronomically low you have to back it up. and even then it’s not a good argument.
what do you even mean by infantilize? if you’re not doing the most basic, demonstrably beneficial way to save more lives including yours and others, forcing you to do it is not infantilizing an adult, it’s appropriately forcing someone who can’t be an adult to act like one.
but this is just to meet you at your inane level. in reality this kind of law is very effective at making more mindful of their safety, even if idiots among them do it begrudgingly. if not for laws like this pretty much no one would fasten their seatbelt or wear a helmet on a bike, not because they’re irresponsible but because it wouldn’t occur to them or they wouldn’t realize the importance and severity of such measures.
People have a right to make stupid decisions, even ones that would be dangerous to themselves.
We know this is the case because fast food isn’t illegal - it’s just that people (in this thread) are too stupid to see the contradictions in their own logic. Seatbelts are just a really oddly specific example of people choosing to police other people’s stupid decisions, for some reason.
it’s appropriately forcing someone who can’t be an adult to act like one.
I don’t think I could have worded in a more infantilizing manner if I tried, so thanks for proving my point I guess?
in reality this kind of law is very effective at making more mindful of their safety, even if idiots among them do it begrudgingly.
There are other ways to incentivize this behavior that doesn’t involve becoming an infantilizing nanny state. Significantly higher insurance premiums for people who choose not to buckle up, for example.
Cigarettes are another great example - they’re not illegal, but the government gives people financial incentives not to use them in the form of sin taxes.
There are many ways to disincentivize stupid behavior while still respecting the right of people to make those stupid choices.
cigarettes should absolutely be illegal, as they infringe on other people’s rights.
fast food is a ridiculous comparison. by the same logic shooting people should be legal because coughing in public isn’t illegal, since both are “unhealthy” for people around you.
and again, accidents aren’t personal. they involve others.
You live in civilization – that’s a choice you made. You adhere to a social contract. Your liberty after a certain point takes a back seat. This shouldn’t need explaining.
And yet here I am having to needlessly explain that that’s only necessary when the chance of those externalities is severe enough to warrant this consideration.
As I’ve shown in this thread, that’s not the case, and the dangers you’re all supposedly worried about aren’t actually real dangers.
But you’ve all confused shouldn’t with can’t (whether intentionally or otherwise), and your moral superiority complexes over people having the audacity to make stupid decisions won’t let you acknowledge that.
If you are a passenger sitting behind someone and you don’t use your seatbelt you crush the person in front of you in case of a frontal colision, and if you are sitting next to someone and get hit from the side you can break both your skulls on each other
Ah, there’s the “what about the other passengers in the car” argument I’ve been waiting for.
The problem is that all other objects become deadly internal projectiles in the case of an accident as well. If we really cared that much about the danger from projectiles, then by law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not firmly secured by them.
The reason, of course, that that isn’t mandated is the same as the answer to all of the other questions in this thread: in the end it’s really just about policing people’s behavior and choices (and securing an additional revenue stream for cops, as well as a handy excuse to pull people over).
Not everything can become a deadly projectile lmao, that’s not how basic physics works, a 60+Kg person does become a deadly projectile at a certain speed
That’s a laptop, it can have sharp, hard edges and can be quite heavy, you can literally die from falling over on the street, it also doesn’t prove that “everything” can become a deadly projectile
There are no goalposts shifted, you should use seatbelts, if you want to go for a darwin award and kill yourself or someone in your car by not wearing one, then be my guest, I don’t give a fuck
We seem to be in complete agreement then, except that I’m at least a little bit sad for the idiots that make this choice.
I just don’t believe in forcefully preventing other people from making decisions I think are stupid, as long as those choices don’t significantly affect others around them. And from the way everyone in this thread is grasping at straws to fabricate incredibly flimsy “harm” scenarios, I think we can safely conclude that that’s not actually the case with seatbelts.
Google it meathead
Being ejected from a car in a crash significantly increases the risk of fatal injuries, with statistics indicating that around 81% of people ejected from vehicles in accidents are killed, according to Carpey Law. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that occupants ejected from a vehicle are three times more likely to suffer fatal injuries compared to those who remain restrained, according to Newsome Melton. Seat belts are the most effective safety equipment in preventing vehicle ejections.
I’m not going to gore websites for your pleasure, but liveleaks used to be a gold mine for you apparently
This is a proven fact. If you want to ve a complete moron, then you’re no better than a flat earther or an antivaxxer, in which case fuck you and I’m not going to waste my time on you
So… still no evidence whatsoever for that “proven fact”, then, eh?
The difference is that flat earthers are presented with evidence that they’re ignoring, but nobody has presented any evidence in this thread for me to ignore, even though this is supposedly such a huge problem.
Sounds like we should mandate strapping down all objects in the car then, right? Since you’re arguing we mandate that for people?
By law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not secured by them. Right? Because you’re so concerned about this one case you were able to find that wasn’t even a person?
That’s fair, but it just frustrates me the way that people bend over backwards to justify what is clearly an excuse for bastard cops to a) fill their coffers and b) more importantly, find an easy excuse to pull you over and violate your rights even further.
Everyone is acting like this is about safety, and about “the trauma of poor road cleaners”, but the cops and legislators who put this in place don’t give a fuck about your safety, and they certainly don’t give a fuck about the trauma of blue collar road workers - they just want to give themselves more opportunities to arrest brown people, and it’s ridiculous that the people in here spouting ACAB all over Lemmy don’t recognize that.
Nope, it doesn’t.
The chances of that happening are so astronomically low as to be practically impossible, and it doesn’t hold a candle to the violation of personal liberty.
personal liberty includes children’s right to have a parent alive and well for as long as possible even if they’re too stupid to take measures against risk of an accident.
all laws are limits on personal liberty. that alone isn’t a good argument against any law.
also if you’re gonna say the risk of something is astronomically low you have to back it up. and even then it’s not a good argument.
Infantilize adults for the sake of the children, got it.
Probably the worst take I’ve seen in this thread, and that’s saying something.
why, did you not see yours?
what do you even mean by infantilize? if you’re not doing the most basic, demonstrably beneficial way to save more lives including yours and others, forcing you to do it is not infantilizing an adult, it’s appropriately forcing someone who can’t be an adult to act like one.
but this is just to meet you at your inane level. in reality this kind of law is very effective at making more mindful of their safety, even if idiots among them do it begrudgingly. if not for laws like this pretty much no one would fasten their seatbelt or wear a helmet on a bike, not because they’re irresponsible but because it wouldn’t occur to them or they wouldn’t realize the importance and severity of such measures.
People have a right to make stupid decisions, even ones that would be dangerous to themselves.
We know this is the case because fast food isn’t illegal - it’s just that people (in this thread) are too stupid to see the contradictions in their own logic. Seatbelts are just a really oddly specific example of people choosing to police other people’s stupid decisions, for some reason.
I don’t think I could have worded in a more infantilizing manner if I tried, so thanks for proving my point I guess?
There are other ways to incentivize this behavior that doesn’t involve becoming an infantilizing nanny state. Significantly higher insurance premiums for people who choose not to buckle up, for example.
Cigarettes are another great example - they’re not illegal, but the government gives people financial incentives not to use them in the form of sin taxes.
There are many ways to disincentivize stupid behavior while still respecting the right of people to make those stupid choices.
cigarettes should absolutely be illegal, as they infringe on other people’s rights.
fast food is a ridiculous comparison. by the same logic shooting people should be legal because coughing in public isn’t illegal, since both are “unhealthy” for people around you.
and again, accidents aren’t personal. they involve others.
Yikes, I think with you having this many bad takes in such a short span, we’re probably not going to reach a place where we see eye to eye on this.
You live in civilization – that’s a choice you made. You adhere to a social contract. Your liberty after a certain point takes a back seat. This shouldn’t need explaining.
And yet here I am having to needlessly explain that that’s only necessary when the chance of those externalities is severe enough to warrant this consideration.
As I’ve shown in this thread, that’s not the case, and the dangers you’re all supposedly worried about aren’t actually real dangers.
But you’ve all confused shouldn’t with can’t (whether intentionally or otherwise), and your moral superiority complexes over people having the audacity to make stupid decisions won’t let you acknowledge that.
If you are a passenger sitting behind someone and you don’t use your seatbelt you crush the person in front of you in case of a frontal colision, and if you are sitting next to someone and get hit from the side you can break both your skulls on each other
Ah, there’s the “what about the other passengers in the car” argument I’ve been waiting for.
The problem is that all other objects become deadly internal projectiles in the case of an accident as well. If we really cared that much about the danger from projectiles, then by law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not firmly secured by them.
The reason, of course, that that isn’t mandated is the same as the answer to all of the other questions in this thread: in the end it’s really just about policing people’s behavior and choices (and securing an additional revenue stream for cops, as well as a handy excuse to pull people over).
Not everything can become a deadly projectile lmao, that’s not how basic physics works, a 60+Kg person does become a deadly projectile at a certain speed
From someone on your side of the argument lower in the thread.
Oops…
That’s a laptop, it can have sharp, hard edges and can be quite heavy, you can literally die from falling over on the street, it also doesn’t prove that “everything” can become a deadly projectile
And how far exactly would you like those goalposts of yours to be shifted?
There are no goalposts shifted, you should use seatbelts, if you want to go for a darwin award and kill yourself or someone in your car by not wearing one, then be my guest, I don’t give a fuck
We seem to be in complete agreement then, except that I’m at least a little bit sad for the idiots that make this choice.
I just don’t believe in forcefully preventing other people from making decisions I think are stupid, as long as those choices don’t significantly affect others around them. And from the way everyone in this thread is grasping at straws to fabricate incredibly flimsy “harm” scenarios, I think we can safely conclude that that’s not actually the case with seatbelts.
??? Astronomically low? Even a crash at 10 to 20 Km/h can turn you into a meat projectile, dumbass
Then it should be suuuper easy to find evidence of a fatality due to a human projectile from a car accident if this is such a huge concern.
I’ll wait. Don’t worry, I’m patient.
Google it meathead Being ejected from a car in a crash significantly increases the risk of fatal injuries, with statistics indicating that around 81% of people ejected from vehicles in accidents are killed, according to Carpey Law. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that occupants ejected from a vehicle are three times more likely to suffer fatal injuries compared to those who remain restrained, according to Newsome Melton. Seat belts are the most effective safety equipment in preventing vehicle ejections.
You’ve completely misunderstood the argument.
People should be allowed to do things that are dangerous.
The people in this thread are arguing that becoming a human projectile is dangerous to other people, and I’m asking them to provide evidence of this.
I’m not going to gore websites for your pleasure, but liveleaks used to be a gold mine for you apparently
This is a proven fact. If you want to ve a complete moron, then you’re no better than a flat earther or an antivaxxer, in which case fuck you and I’m not going to waste my time on you
So… still no evidence whatsoever for that “proven fact”, then, eh?
The difference is that flat earthers are presented with evidence that they’re ignoring, but nobody has presented any evidence in this thread for me to ignore, even though this is supposedly such a huge problem.
Not a person but a laptop
I bet you weigh more than a laptop. Even if I wasn’t killed by you, if I was hurt more because of you I would be pissed.
Sounds like we should mandate strapping down all objects in the car then, right? Since you’re arguing we mandate that for people?
By law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not secured by them. Right? Because you’re so concerned about this one case you were able to find that wasn’t even a person?
Jesus, you’re a fucking moron.
How do you know his name is Jesús?
Great argument, I’m convinced!
I must say, this is a very stupid hill to die on.
That’s fair, but it just frustrates me the way that people bend over backwards to justify what is clearly an excuse for bastard cops to a) fill their coffers and b) more importantly, find an easy excuse to pull you over and violate your rights even further.
Everyone is acting like this is about safety, and about “the trauma of poor road cleaners”, but the cops and legislators who put this in place don’t give a fuck about your safety, and they certainly don’t give a fuck about the trauma of blue collar road workers - they just want to give themselves more opportunities to arrest brown people, and it’s ridiculous that the people in here spouting ACAB all over Lemmy don’t recognize that.