Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 11/08/85; site unccvax.unccvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!unccvax!dsi
From: dsi@unccvax.UUCP (Dataspan Inc)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.auto
Subject: Re: Massachusetts seat belt law
Message-ID: <394@unccvax.unccvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Dec-85 08:35:41 EST
Article-I.D.: unccvax.394
Posted: Mon Dec 16 08:35:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Dec-85 04:41:31 EST
References: <294@frog.UUCP> <751@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: UNC-Charlotte
Lines: 50
Xref: watmath net.politics:12510 net.auto:8830

> mucho grumbling about Taxachusetts seat belt law

     Frankly, I am sick and tired of paying higher insurance premiums for
both automobile and major medical, because of the 90 % of you who don't care
to belt up when you drive. Rehashing old John Stuart Mill arguments about
freedom is moot.  The fact that the difference between reconstructive surgury
and a sore shoulder is made every hour of every day by those who wear their
belts should be sufficient reason for everyone to belt up voluntarily.

    But NOOOOOOO! 

    Then again, there is the cost to "society" because of the incredible
pain and suffering "utils" accumulated due solely to non belt wearing. You
can't find me one person lying in a hospital bed right now (due to their
non-belt-wearing results) who would state that being there was worth it because
they wanted to be civilly disobedient.  Howsa 'bout that guy in the next
E-R suite whose situation wasn't preventable, but isn't getting all the
medical attention he possibly could because person B didn't care to wear 
their belts and is bleeding buckets onto the floor.

     Anti-belties have a point: people who defy the law are engaged in
natural selection.  This would be fine if people were only responsible to
themselves, but 99.5% are not so antisocial.  However, the "natural selection"
business may be true among non-belt-users: I have noticed an amazing correlation
between the most grusome wrecks and non-belt usage.  Usually, the frame benders
exhibit no belt usage, bald tyres, brake pads down to the rivets, etc. 
We're not talking about ghetto junk either, but rather cars owned presumably
by responsible family types who don't beat their kids, go to church, etc.

     The true libertarian would be against Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) because as free thinking, rational humans, they alone should be able
to decide whether or not a vehicle is fit.  As a practicing engineer, I am
not even able to determine (from ordinary inspection) whether a new vehicle
is fit or not from an engineering standpoint.  

     As a driving enthusiast and recreational mechanic, I * know * that people
permit their vehicles to deteriorate to levels which are patently defective.
There are tons of this junk on the road right outside the door here.  If they
aren't going to pull their damn drums and caliper their rotors, the least that
they can do for themselves is to belt up in prepration for the inevitable.
For you enthusiasts who carry "On Liberty" in the glove compartment, you 
need to prepare for that aforementioned jerk who can't spare the cost of a 
couple of cases of beer to get Michelins instead of Western Auto Macho Belteds.

     Seat belt laws are trivial.  It could be much worse.  You could have
to demonstrate your proficiency on a skidpad, or have your vehicle impounded
for piss-poor mechanical maintainence.

David Anthony
DataSpan, Inc