Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site frog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!think!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!tdh
From: tdh@frog.UUCP (T. Dave Hudson)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.auto
Subject: Re: Massachusetts seat belt law
Message-ID: <304@frog.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Dec-85 20:05:59 EST
Article-I.D.: frog.304
Posted: Thu Dec 26 20:05:59 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Dec-85 04:36:17 EST
References: <294@frog.UUCP> <806@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1467@jhunix.UUCP> <958@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 74
Xref: watmath net.politics:12692 net.auto:8902

>> According to that "reasoning" we should ban smoking--after
>> all, more people getting lung cancer raises everybody's
>> insurance rate ...
>>
>> Furthermore, the same should be applied to, for instance,
>> fires started by cigarettes...

> Lung cancer and house fires are irrelevant to the seat belt issue.  It
> needs no pseudo-reasoning by analogy to be discussed.  Auto insurance
> rates are going through the roof, and it seems evident that a few simple
> corrective measures can bring them down for everyone.  
> 
> If a problem is decidable on its own merits, one need not introduce
> irrelevant analogies to confound the issue.

That is a request to evaluate an issue out of context.  The
examples were not only analogous but were of closely related
issues.

I'd say that, rhetorically, the analogies were aimed at the
hypocrisy widespread among advocates of the mandatory
seat belt laws.  (But, as usual, the inference of purpose is
educated guessing.)  I was at a party not long ago, and got
into a discussion on the subject.  There was one woman who
said that she thought it was stupid not to wear a seat belt,
but who admitted that there were times that she had not worn
one, for reasons of (ahem) comfort -- which, if I understood
correctly, is one of the major popular reasons not to wear
belts at times -- the risk had its rewards.  There was a man
who declared he had never worn a seat belt, and furthermore
when the law went into effect still wouldn't wear one.
Those two people were the two most vocal advocates of the
damned new law.

The woman was right.  It is stupid not to have a restraint
in case of collision *as a general practice or in dangerous
road or traffic conditions*.  But it is also stupid (for the
average person) to avoid public contact for fear of catching
a cold, to avoid sports for fear of injury, or to avoid
swimming for fear of drowning.

(I also found out that I have cut back too far on local
news; there is an effort underway to place the repeal of the
seat belt law on the ballot.  I don't know if it will
succeed.  It needs 30,000 validated signatures, no more than
1/4 of which may come from any given county.  At an
optimistic rejection rate of 20%, that means gathering about
38,000 signatures by 6 January 1986.  If the repeal makes it
to the ballot, it will be a great opportunity for arguing
about the proper justifications for laws.  If not now,
maybe later.)

Even if rising auto insurance premiums were cause for
action, an honest person would still have to examine what
was behind them and their proposed antidotes in order to
decide how best to act.  For example (trying to choose
from angles not already shown):

- Why have medical costs in general been rising?
- What is behind the attitude "Sue them if you can.  They
  would sue you if they could." that inflates premiums?
- Why aren't insurance companies able to judge better
  whether someone generally wears a belt or doesn't,
  and assess premiums accordingly?  (It is ironic that they
  are deterred from discriminating when discrimination is
  essential to assessing risk.)
- Why do so many people treat the matter of using seat belts
  amorally, as if the law spared them from moral judgement,
  and statistics from analysis?
- What part of auto insurance premiums is due to
  seatbeltlessness, and what parts are due to, e.g.,
  Reagan's "voluntary" import quotas on cars?

				David Hudson