Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site iheds.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!iheds!kmw
From: kmw@iheds.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: mandatory seatbelt laws
Message-ID: <322@iheds.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jan-84 13:58:05 EST
Article-I.D.: iheds.322
Posted: Mon Jan 23 13:58:05 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Jan-84 06:06:55 EST
References: <895@uw-june>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 17

I agree that it is not the government's business to protect the individual
against stupidity that only injures the self.  However, as the system now
is structured, X's failure to wear seatbelts results in an increase in
my medical insurance premiums.  To be fair, insurance rates should be
correlated with all known voluntarily assumed risk factors (smoking for
life insurance, drinking for accident insurance, etc.).  Verifying this
sort of thing gets very tricky, though.  It would be impossible (or at least
unaccptable!) for insurance inspectors to go around spying on whether
a customer paying seatbelt-wearer rates does indeed buckle up on the
way to work in the morning....  The only acceptable
method, from a privacy point of view, is to invalidate the insurance
if the insured lied (committed fraud):  if a driver goes through the
windshield and was paying seatbelt-wearer rates, the insurance company
owes nothing.
-- 
K. M. Wilber
iheds!kmw or mvuxt!kw