Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646
From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Seat belts
Message-ID: <1560027@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 21-Apr-85 13:52:00 EST
Article-I.D.: acf4.1560027
Posted: Sun Apr 21 13:52:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Apr-85 01:36:17 EST
References: <552@abnji.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 32


>From: lrd@drusd.UUCP (L. R. DuBroff)

>HORSE MANURE!  There are circumstances under which a driver is not able
>to control his/her car unless s/he is held firmly in the driver's seat.
>In these situatations, an unbelted driver is endangering anyone who is
>unfortunate enough to be in the immediate vicinity.
>
>If you want to drive without seatbelts, fine -- do it on your own piece
>of real estate.  If you come out on publicly funded roads, in traffic with
>other people, it is your obligation to do so in a responsible manner.
>
>Drivers who demonstrate a lack of responsibility should lose the privilege
>of driving on public roads.
>/* ---------- */

The problem with this argument, is that it does not specify how far
we must go in restricting drivers.  Should we insist that alll drivers
attend classes oonce a week or so, to improve their driving skills,
thereby making the roads safer?  Should we not allow drivers to talk
while driving, because they should concentrate completely on their driving?
Clearly, this type of argument can be taken too far.  But where do
you stop?  To say, as the law frequently does, that we are only to
impose "reasonable" restrictions is inadequate without explaining what
the standard for reasonableness is.

Obviously, it is unfair for reckless drivers to be allowed to operate
freely on taxpayer funded roads.  The real solution, however, is not
to restrict the liberty of all drivers, but to move toward a system
of privately funded roads.

					Michael Sykora