Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stricter Seat Belt Law Goes Into Effect In Mississippi (Good Law or Just Big Brother)
WREG ^ | 5-26-06 | Melissa Moon

Posted on 05/26/2006 9:23:51 AM PDT by WKB

Southaven - Not wearing a seatbelt will soon be enough to get you pulled over by police or state troopers in Mississippi. Saturday the state's new primary offense seat belt law goes into effect.

Right now the Mississippi has a secondary offense seat belt law. That means officers need another reason, like speeding, to pull you over. It's only after you pulled over that officers are allowed to ticket you for not buckling up.

Law enforcement officers can also pull a driver over if they notice that his front seat passenger or anyone in the vehicle is not wearing a seat belt.

Law enforcement officers throughout the mid south plan to beef up their patrols over the long holiday weekend. Troopers in Mississippi plan to set up road blocks in several parts of the state to check for seat belt use.

Mississippi is the 23rd state where officers can pull over a driver for not wear a seat belt. Tennessee passed a primary seat belt law back in 2004.

The new law in Mississippi carries a maximum fine of 25 dollars per vehicle.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: bigbrother; govwatch; leo; nannystate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-116 next last
To: lndrvr1972

Nonsense; your insurance costs are driven by ordinary inflation more than by driver habits which are obviously not about to change anytime soon.


51 posted on 05/26/2006 10:43:24 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

Nanny laws for citizens and NO laws for illegals. I agree with you only I will never obey the seatbelt law. It is my business if I buckle up or not. That argument about other people's responsibility if I am in an accident is just BS and I don't even care. What about mountain climbers who want to be saved in emergencies and boats during storms? Do these people pay for the cost of their enjoyment? Ain't no different as far as I am concerned.


52 posted on 05/26/2006 10:44:13 AM PDT by Snoopers-868th (Send-a-Brick.com. Send a brick to Washington and cash to Minutemen for a wall.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
"Ultimately we need 2 reforms in the US that would make so much of this weeping and gnashing moot: a) No income tax b) Loser-pays court system "

Boy you hit a hot button on #2. I am in a battle right now costing me $2,000 more in legal fees to get a general contractor and a sub-contractor to fix my roof after they screwed it up big time. Both admit the problem was theirs but the sub placed a lien on my house and threaten with his lower than whale poop lawyers to foreclose. Even though I am assured to win, unless the Senate grants contractor amnesty, I have to pay $2,000+ to get them to do it right. Boy a shot gun shell is so much cheaper. I just don't know who to fire it at. The contractors or the lawyers. Hell, buy 2 their cheap.

53 posted on 05/26/2006 10:45:22 AM PDT by Wurlitzer (The difference between democrats and terrorists is the terrorists don't claim to support the troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: #1CTYankee
Just the Government looking out for us idiots, everyone knows were too stupid to make the right choices dontcha know?

You might think you're being facetious - but you are right. Anytime some idiot who doesn't wear a seatbelt gets in an accident, then the rest of us have to pay (either through higher insurance premiums or taxes for Medicaid/Medicare) to keep their sorry brain-dead ass alive. Or we have to pay for extensive medical treatments or expensive rehab - etc.

I think that anyone in a car accident who wasn't wearing their seatbelt (or a motorcycle accident with no helmet) should give up any rights to insurance-paid or taxpayer-paid health benefits.

Obviously some people ARE stupid enough not to wear seatbelts without being forced to by someone. (And who else would that "someone" be - if not the government?)

54 posted on 05/26/2006 10:46:28 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

The dangerous flying passenger is far less frequent than the occasional appearance of Jesus on a dirty window pane; however, it has become a legend.


55 posted on 05/26/2006 10:46:34 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tokra
(And who else would that "someone" be - if not the government?)

Maybe a good little hall monitor like you.

56 posted on 05/26/2006 10:50:27 AM PDT by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
You have GOT to be kidding me! This is shocking in so many ways....commie MA DELETING a law? Naaahhh.....what was it REPLACED with?

For some time,we've had a seat belt law that says that cops can't *stop* you because you're not wearing your belt,but if you're stopped for something else (broken tail light,for example) they can cite you for not being belted as well as the broken light.

What was killed was a bill to give cops the right to stop you simply for not being belted which is what's called a "primary" seat belt law.

57 posted on 05/26/2006 10:51:42 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: luckystarmom
"The problem with seat belts is that if someone is not wearing them, they can be hurt by someon else (and then they can sue)."

People get hurt with seatbelts as well, that's not a valid argument.

The truth is the people in the back seat are the one's that should be required to wear them, some countries do because of the head/neck injuries sustained by front seat passengers during collisions.

58 posted on 05/26/2006 10:54:40 AM PDT by #1CTYankee (That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: metesky
Maybe a good little hall monitor like you.

People who think these types of laws "don't affect anyone else" are idiots. When we all have to pay for your stupidity - then it does affect us all.

We have a government to enforce societal rules, so the rest of us don't have to.

Do you believe we might not need a "good little hall monitor" to stop people from murdering each other? Or from stealing from each other? Or from burning each other's house down?

Or should maybe the government do the job.

Isn't that why it exists?

Or maybe you are one of these people who think the "evil government" should not do any of these things?

If so, I bet you'd change your tune if your house was on fire and you wanted the fire department to come and put it out.

59 posted on 05/26/2006 10:59:20 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: WKB
"Troopers in Mississippi plan to set up road blocks in several parts of the state to check for seat belt use."

Gotta stop them international criminals, yezzir!

(Psssst! Besides, it brings in a lot of revenue.)

60 posted on 05/26/2006 11:01:22 AM PDT by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tokra
Quite a list of strawmen there, Skippy.

These are the arguments of a gullible boob who yearns for governmental control over every aspect of society.

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." - William Pitt

If you're happy and you know it, clank your chains...

61 posted on 05/26/2006 11:14:14 AM PDT by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

I repeat:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1638790/posts?page=35#35


62 posted on 05/26/2006 11:16:10 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

You're kidding me....MA doesn't have that already? This is truly shocking! CT had it 11 years ago! How can its ultra-lib neighbor not have same?

(OK, you meant it killed a BILL - not a LAW - which is less exciting. Don't worry, it will be passed some day.)


63 posted on 05/26/2006 11:18:39 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e
I was in an accident once where had I have been wearing a seat belt i would have been killed or at least seriously injured. We were "T-boned" by a car coming at a high rate of speed. i was in the passengers seat and saw the car coming and new it was going to hit us. I jumped on top of the driver. The car was about half its original width after the wreck. The passenger's seat was partly on top of the driver's seat and the passenger side door was smashed down on the passenger's seat about half way across it, right where I had been sitting. Had I have been strapped to that seat I would have been crushed.

I know that most of the time you are better off in a wreck if you are wearing a seat belt, but not always. I do always wear a seat belt when I'm on a long trip or driving on mountain roads, but rarely in town. I hate the seat belt laws. It is my business if I wear a seat belt and no one else's. I have tons of insurance, and a considerable amount of assets. They say "click it or ticket." I say take your ticket and stick it. We don't even have helmet laws in my state and they harass people about seat belts? Some yahoo cop can pull me over on his two wheeled death trap motorcycle and write me a ticket for not wearing my seat belt? I'll wear my seat belt when I feel like I should be wearing it, and anyone who doesn't like that can kiss my rear end.

These laws that allow cops to pull you over for not wearing a seat belt are favorites of cops really for one reason. With those laws it's easier for them to pull over whoever they want to pull over and shake them down. It makes it easier for them to harass people, search them for drugs, whatever. Cops and prosecutors love laws like these. "Freedom loving people" should hate laws like these. Give the government an inch and they'll take a mile. These types of laws and others along the same vein are the way governments incrementally steal our freedom a little bit at a time and eventually subject us to living in a police state where no one is safe from their tyrannical intrusions. That may seem overly dramatic, but that's the way I feel. I've been working in the criminal justice system a lot of years and I'm not liking the way I'm seeing things change. More and more we have law enforcement working undercover, even the game and fish and park rangers are getting in on it, spying on their fellow Americans. More and more we're seeing the use of paid and/or coerced "confidential informants" who will say and do whatever they have to say or do to make their money or save their own butts. And more and more we are seeing legislators and courts make it easier for law enforcement to stop people, search them, and generally intrude in their quiet enjoyment of life. Our incarceration rate has shot up to the point in the last few decades that it is the absolute highest of any nation in the world, several times higher than it ever was at any point in our nation's history prior to 1979. Politicians keep passing more and more laws criminalizing more and more conduct, increasing punishments, turning misdemeanors into felonies, and on and on and on. Police keep getting more and more militarized, with the motto "to protect and serve" just becoming a quaint memory of bygone days. Things are changing, and not for the better.
64 posted on 05/26/2006 11:18:40 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tokra
"Obviously some people ARE stupid enough not to wear seatbelts without being forced to by someone. (And who else would that "someone" be - if not the government?)"

IMO a poor argument, the federal Gov't back when Dole was transportation Sec. tried to stop the insurance industry's push to require air bags in cars.

They attempted to do this by requiring automakers to equip cars with automatic seat belts or air bags by such and such a date.

The Insurance agency won out and car were required to have airbags.

How did they win? If you die in an auto accident they write a check, done deal.
The largest costs were paying for cosmetic surgery for those who faces didn't come out so good, airbags took care of that.

My buddy is a paramedic and refuses to wear seat belts, he says he'd rather die in an accident then end up a veg because a seat belt kept him alive but brain dead.
He might be wrong but he's been one for 20 years so he's seen a fair share of accidents.

I always wear my seat belt but I'm sick and tired of the government treating people like children, makes me sick.

65 posted on 05/26/2006 11:21:07 AM PDT by #1CTYankee (That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

I repeat again....

Where does it end?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1638790/posts?page=33#33

MURDER is the equivalent of NOT WEARING SEAT BELT? Absurd.

MURDER is DIRECTLY VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER. So are all the other capital crimes you cite.

This trickle-down effect rationalization is utter nonsense - it means we can make laws on EVERY SINGLE THING WE DO. Because IT ALL AFFECTS SOMEONE SOMEHOW DOWN THE ROAD!


66 posted on 05/26/2006 11:22:23 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: metesky

"If you're happy and you know it, clank your chains..."


ROFL!


67 posted on 05/26/2006 11:23:34 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: WKB
There are a heck of a lot of people out on the roads who don't even know how to drive.

This is all about money.

There's no money in getting bad drivers off the road.

68 posted on 05/26/2006 11:25:26 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: metesky
These are the arguments of a gullible boob who yearns for governmental control over every aspect of society.

"Every aspect of society"????

Where on earth do you get that from? Because I think the government's job is to protect citizens from murder, theft and fire? That is "every aspect of society"?

Talk about strawmen!

Go ahead and drive without a seatbelt. When you go flying through your windshield and smash your empty head against the pavement - don't ask the rest of us to subsidize your medical care.

Some folks here remind me of the folks at DU - everything is "all or nothing". Guess what? There is a happy medium. The goverment is not "all evil" or "all Nanny-state".

Because I don't want to foot the bill for idiots - you somehow construe that into: I am a "gullible boob" and think that I "yearn for governmental control over every aspect of society."

Great logic there buddy.

69 posted on 05/26/2006 11:26:25 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: #1CTYankee

Aren't you also tired of the condescending statements on local TV news of accidents making sure they tell you the dead or greatly injured were "not wearing their seatbelts"?

Boy, what a campaign! Yet notice sometimes they make no such statement at all - gee, all were wearing their seatbelts yet somebody died and somebody lost a leg? Not possible!


70 posted on 05/26/2006 11:29:58 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
MURDER is DIRECTLY VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER. So are all the other capital crimes you cite.

And when you cost me money because you failed to wear a seat belt - you have VIOLATED THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER.

That is much different from something happening to you through no fault of your own. But your conscious decision NOT to protect yourself with a seatbelt VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER.

71 posted on 05/26/2006 11:30:25 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

Your STRAWMAN was comparing REAL crimes - against natural law - that actually VIOLATE OTHER'S RIGHTS, to a stupid non-issue that tenuously minimally trickle-down affects many thousands by maybe raising their rate by $1.

And who says you should be forced to pay for others? Guess what - that's a violation of your natural rights, too! So, GET RID OF FORCED INSURANCE.

Then what's your argument?


72 posted on 05/26/2006 11:33:50 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

It is completely absurd to start worrying about trickkle-down effects on every person in society. That is why that poster said your logic leads to nit-picking bullying on every aspect of living - because guess what?

EVERYTHING YOU DO AFFECTS EVERYONE ELSE, SOMEHOW.

Albeit maybe only down to the 10th or 20th rung.

So, by your logic, you must regulate and enforce every single thing you do in your waking life.

Such as, not eating candy? You don't want to pay for dental or even heart disasters through "shared" insurance?


73 posted on 05/26/2006 11:37:14 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: WKB
We've had mandatory seat belt laws in Texas for years. One State Trooper who used to teach the defensive driving classes, mad the comment about seat belts.

"I never unbuckled a dead person at an accident."
74 posted on 05/26/2006 11:42:02 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (Don't mess with Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB
They go from secondary offense to primary to zero tolerance in ever instance of this seat belt crap. It's called incrementalism. Here in Indiana, we are a couple years ahead of you. We have 8 million statist laws that basically say kids have to be tied down with duct tape backwards in the backseat in a booster cage until age 28.

The nanny safety statists are one of the biggest threats to freedom in our time.
75 posted on 05/26/2006 11:42:43 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

The scum suckers promised us here in Indiana that it wouldn't be made a primary offense. It took like five years. Watch out, because now they have the jackboots out stopping cars in Indianapolis and outside the other major cities.


76 posted on 05/26/2006 11:46:11 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: WKB

What I don't get is the 10 handicapped parking places in front of 24 hour Fitness!


77 posted on 05/26/2006 11:47:06 AM PDT by gc4nra ( this tag line protected by Kimber and the First Amendment (I voted for McClintock))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gc4nra

I saw a handicap parking spot at a
"Sonic Drive Up" in Vicksburg Ms and to top it
off it was the one farthest from the front door.


78 posted on 05/26/2006 11:50:02 AM PDT by WKB (D.L. Moody "The Bible was not written for your information, but for your transformation")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Tokra
If I'm wasting my time arguing with you, I must have already smashed my head on the pavement.

Conflating murder, arson and robbery with not wearing a seat belt isn't a strawman argument? Where did you take your logic courses, Sophist U?

Accusing others of "reminding you of DU" is just a classic sign of running out of logic, Skippy.

Your love of government incrementalism marks you as a statist who believes all good emanates from gooberment. Loosen up that sphincter and enjoy, enjoy, enjoy your reaming.

When you come out of the ether with a sore rectum and a quarter in your hand, it'll be a government agent with his hands on your shoulders, not your proctologist or the tooth fairy.

79 posted on 05/26/2006 12:00:36 PM PDT by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: WKB

"The new law in Mississippi carries a maximum fine of 25 dollars per vehicle.
Annette M. Jordan, 4213 Will O'Run Drive, Jackson - Improper parking (handicap), $200.50 fine."


Apparently, improper parking in a handicap space is far
more dangerous and deadly than driving without a seatbelt.


80 posted on 05/26/2006 12:36:09 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabz; traviskicks

ping


81 posted on 05/26/2006 12:38:21 PM PDT by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB

LOL!

I should have read the comments.
You made the same point I did, but
you made it a lot sooner than I did.


82 posted on 05/26/2006 12:38:59 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WKB

If You do Nothing Wrong, You have Nothing to Fear.
We are At War Now.
It's for The Children.


83 posted on 05/26/2006 12:46:26 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB


Fine or no fine, law or no law, I use my seat belt faithfully.


84 posted on 05/26/2006 12:55:10 PM PDT by onyx (Deport the trolls --- send them back to DU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: untrained skeptic
Trying to keep people safe is reasonably noble cause.

"Keep people safe" implies ownership.

I don't belong to the state.

85 posted on 05/26/2006 2:39:12 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz

I have been in two serious accidents with no seatbelt. In both cases with a seatbelt I would have been seriously injured or killed. I wear a seatbelt now because of the law of averages and the law period.
Not to hijack the thread, but about handicap parking, I have been told that you cannot be ticketed in a handicap zone on private property, as in Walmart parking lot as opposed to a space on the street or the courthouse lot. Is that correct? Also the design of the logo has to meet certain specifications to be valid.


86 posted on 05/26/2006 2:44:00 PM PDT by OldEagle (May you live long enough to hear the legends of your own adventures.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
Well, that hit my funny bone just right.

Kudos.

87 posted on 05/26/2006 2:45:49 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

If you think its bad now, wait until fully socilialized healthcare gets implemented. It will be every nanny-stater's wet dream as every concievable activity will come under their regulation because, hey, 'Society has to pay for it'.

The fact that even on FR, people are arguing that because of socialism we need more socialism tells me it is a foregone conclusion.

Freedom, we hardly knew ye.


88 posted on 05/26/2006 2:57:52 PM PDT by somniferum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: somniferum
Freedom, we hardly knew ye.

Poignant, and true.

Collectivism has gained the upper hand, so we must all be collectivists.

Stunning how Americans have become so sheeplike so fast.

89 posted on 05/26/2006 3:03:23 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e
With that in mind, I think this is a good law.

People ought to wear their belts. Police checkpoints are an awfully high price to pay to make them do it. It's a lose-lose scenario.

90 posted on 05/26/2006 3:21:33 PM PDT by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer
If you don't do xyz then your insurance company and the American taxpayer are off the hook.

This is impracticable. When the ambulance shows up at the scene of a wreck and there's a pretty blonde girl screaming with a shattered pelvis, you're going to tell the paramedics that she failed the breathalyzer so just leave her there?

91 posted on 05/26/2006 3:37:03 PM PDT by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

"Obviously some people ARE stupid enough not to wear seatbelts without being forced to by someone. (And who else would that "someone" be - if not the government?)"

Since when in a free society, do you, as a private citizen, have the right to tell me what to do?

You don't, and because you don't, neither does the Government.

If you want to live in a country where the Government makes your decisions for you, then carry your ass to China.

I'm sure they will accomodate you.


92 posted on 05/26/2006 4:16:53 PM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

" And when you cost me money because you failed to wear a seat belt - you have VIOLATED THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER."

Money? That's all you are worried about? I guess it was a good thing that Rich Successful men back in 1775 didn't have your world view.

We'd still be shouting "God save the King"

Pathetic.


93 posted on 05/26/2006 4:21:16 PM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

Well, the son of a friend from our kids' old school died in a car accident last summer. He'd only just gotten his license, and was breaking the law by having a passenger who was only 16, and didn't have a license. Neither were wearing their seat belts, and BOTH were killed when they were ejected from the car.


94 posted on 05/26/2006 8:30:34 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: CGTRWK
"This is impracticable. When the ambulance shows up at the scene of a wreck and there's a pretty blonde girl screaming with a shattered pelvis, you're going to tell the paramedics that she failed the breathalyzer so just leave her there?"

BS to the infinity power. This straw man argument doesn't fly. Treat the precious little girl then send the fricken bill. What is so hard about that?

Fricken socialist will create any kind of straw man argument to force us all to be responsible for every idiots actions. Maybe a little chlorine in the gene pool is a good thing. Stupid people multiply faster than we can create laws to make us responsible for them.

By the way your straw man argument is racist like we would only care about some little blonde girl not a black girl with black hair.

95 posted on 05/27/2006 6:14:00 AM PDT by Wurlitzer (The difference between democrats and terrorists is the terrorists don't claim to support the troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

The dangerous flying passenger is generally understood to be bouncing around inside the vehicle, did either boy injure a third party in the flight?


96 posted on 05/27/2006 8:11:02 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

I don't analyze things by personal incidents; I was thrown from a 1962 Corvair that flipped from a crosswind and was ejected only to come to my senses hours later around dawn almost 500 feet from the final rest point for the vehicle.

I was told later in the hospital that the car had burned completely after it stopped skidding and rolling.

Had I been belted in, I would have likely died in the flames but that doesn't make me go around arguing that seat belts are dangerous.

My point is that belts don't prevent injuries and often increase them; the notion that all crash injuries are an added burden on society assumes that responders are only on the clock when repairing the damaged victims.

What happens is the fixed costs end up being counted twice when those sort of arguments are made.


97 posted on 05/27/2006 8:19:28 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32; Abram; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Allosaurs_r_us; Americanwolf; ...
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
98 posted on 05/27/2006 8:55:52 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/gasoline_and_government.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Mass. just had a similar bill in its congress and it was shot down.


99 posted on 05/27/2006 9:11:49 AM PDT by Lady Jag (Learning to shrug is the beginning of wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e
With that in mind, I think this is a good law

Interesting logic...Do you think we need a law to punish fat people?
.
100 posted on 05/27/2006 9:15:20 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-116 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson