Quote:
Originally posted by SSearchVT
I wear my seatbelt by choice everytime I get in the car. Personally I don't think it should be a law for adults - sort of.
The problem arises when people are involved in accidents and because they chose not to use readily available and proven safety equipment end up getting injured more severely then if they had used their seatbelt. A large portion of the medical bills for these folks is covered by insurance. Insurance companies need to re-coup losses. They do this by charging higher rates. So, I am paying more money because of a decision someone else made.
Because of this twist I feel it should be a law. Find a way to keep me from having to pay for other peoples decisions and I'll change my position... |
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?