I do not dispute that wearing a seatbelt is a good idea. It increases our safety and reduces injuries. Of that there can be no doubt, but that is not the central issue in this matter. The Central issue is whether or not we are free, or wards of the state.
If we are free, then we have a right to put ourselves at risk if we so chose. The state has no right to constrain us. Especially not if their true purpose is to act as the enforcement arm of a private company.
There is all sorts of things wrong with this idea, not the least of which is the incestuous relationship between private interests and government force. This has the odor of Nazism about it.
The Central issue is whether or not we are free, or wards of the state.
Could not have said it better!
Over all its the damn beauacrats that have been give the power (or responsibility) to come up with every incremental rule they can imagine.
In the instance of car insurance, they incrementally negotiate between us and the insurance companies, theoretically on our behalf, but what results is zero common sense.
I would like to see this simplified into a check list of options we check off when buying Comp/Collision car insurance (Liability insurance SHOULD be mandatory), to which the insurance company says OK this is how much “we” will charge you, but you still are free to shop around. That way supply and demand will give a better deal.
Another poster ragged on about the gubmit forcing us to have insurance. They don’t really mandate you have liability insurance, just that you get no car tag without it, which makes good common sense. The gubmit does not mandate we have Comp/Collision insurance, the loan company says “no insurance covering our investment, no loan”, which again makes good common sense.