Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site sequent.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!hao!hplabs!zehntel!tektronix!ogcvax!sequent!richard
From: richard@sequent.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: mandatory seatbelt laws
Message-ID: <341@sequent.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 25-Jan-84 05:02:19 EST
Article-I.D.: sequent.341
Posted: Wed Jan 25 05:02:19 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Jan-84 01:03:16 EST
References: <895@uw-june>
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Portland
Lines: 46

Although I agree with the premise (Gov should not protect people from
their own *willful* stupidity) I disagree with your stance against
seatbelt laws.  If people who had accidents without belts on would
kindly refrain from using public services - like police, fire, etc -
when they smear themselves inside their windshield, I'd reconsider.  And
if all insurance companies had separate polices for smart and dumb
people (and had some way of telling the difference) that would be nice.

But as it stands, when Joe Cool in his Fiat smashes into something, it
costs ME money.  When all the Joe Cools out there have accidents, that
money becomes significant.  I ride a 400cc motorcycle, and drive an MG.
Although my insurance rates aren't too bad anymore, the fact that people
cruise the roads without sensible protection adds a premium to my
premiums.
	[Non-sequitor...?]
If you want to scream about government interferences in victimless
"crimes," talk about the laws against prostitution, or gambling, or
drug use (when not on the roads, of course.)  For instance, if the 
good Uncle would monopolize and tax the h*ll out of pot use, we would:

o	Save money on persecution, and get revenue from taxes,

o	Have better quality control - people wouldn't die from snorting
	PCP when they thought is was cocaine (note that this also, will
	save the govt some expenses,)

o	Be in a better position to keep drugs away from children,

o	Take a huge amount of business from Organized Crime,

o	Use some of the money left over for *real* treatment and education
	programs.

I think it's time our government got out of the business of determining
what is or isn't a sin.  For those whose religious beliefs might make
them think otherwise, don't you think God's judgement and punishment
(*if* He deems them sinners) is sufficient?

		from the confused and bleeding (and tired) fingertips of
			...!sequent!richard

"Who makes the rules?"
	'Someone else'
"What is the law?"
	'No spill blood!'
		- Danny Elfman