| Seatbelt Law
Obviously choosing to wear your seatbelt is a smarter, safer decision and I'm pretty positive no one here disagrees. I think everyone here agrees wearing one should increase your chances of survival and/or protect you against major injury during an auto accident. You don't need physicist or an engineer to tell me... the proof is in the statistics. You wear your seatbelt = you increase your safety. My concern here is not the question of safety. My main concern is... "choice". I can no longer CHOOSE NOT to wear one.
Any doctor will tell you drinking alcohol isn't healthy. Any doctor will tell you eating fried food is unhealthy. But you still have the choice to eat whatever you want, right? The argument up at the house is insurance costs. They say, "People who are uninsured, and hurt in auto accidents are costing the state money.... in turn "effecting" other people. If everyone wears seatbelts, the health cost will drop." In my opinion, that is the only valid argument and it doesn't validate a law.
I will take this back to the healthy food issue. What is the difference between forcing seatbelts on people to control health costs vs. controlling food intake on unhealthy people to control health cost?
Eating healthy and wearing a seatbelt technically is the "right" thing to do and both will save everyone money. Am I crazy here? What is next... no more McDonalds?
Brian  |