Exterminate!!!
Registered Member
Anal sex is illegal in Utah, US. End of story.
Don't kill yourself, kill others...
- Thread starter Randwolf
- Start date
Anal sex is illegal in Utah, US. End of story.
I am totally against this idea, I like being in control of my car and keeping the government off my ass. I never drink and drive and don't feel like blowing in a machine every time I need to start my car.
Why stop at breathalyzers with your argument? lets have everyone in court get hooked up with a lie detector, lets ban guns, ban fast food restaurants, ban smoking, ban all drugs....
Why not reduce the speed limit, ban larger vehicles, ban faster vehicles... the list can go on and on. Essentially, this is just another form of trading your freedoms for safety.
If a country's citizens are incapable of maintaining self responsibility then fuck it, but I am not giving up my freedoms for other peoples stupidity, even if it means I am at risk of getting in a car accident for it. For the sake of personal freedom, I am willing to take a chance.
You argument sounds logical because this seems so harmless, but giving up freedoms little by little is just as bad as giving them all up at once.
Perhaps you missed the part of my post reading:
In any event, my argument (or complaint, if you prefer) is this:
If I have to live in a society that values legislation in the name of "protection / safety" more than preserving individual freedom of choice, then let's at least be rational about it. In other words, let the government infringe on those choices that potentially affect others rather than mandating something that protects only the person exhibiting poor judgement.
i.e. protect the innocent by preventing drunk driving rather than protect those guilty of not using a seat belt.
My whole argument is based on the a priori assumption that the government is going to interfere in our private lives and restrict our freedom of choice. If this is a given, then surely we can expect (or at least wish for) rationality in determining which of these freedoms to infringe on. In this light, I still think it makes more sense to protect the innocent than the "guilty".
As to your slippery slope argument, it is very valid. The potential for ever increasing restrictions seems to be transforming into reality even now. However, the scope of of this thread really wasn't meant to include the basic debate as to how much, if any, personal liberty should be sacrificed in the name of "safety", but rather to contemplate a single instance. Namely the hypocrisy of mandating seat belt usage, which in general only affects the individual involved, versus mandating use of existing technology to curtail drunk driving which can injure or kill others.
If you had to choose between one or the other, which makes more sense?
hahaha See Baron - you can't have anal sex in U-TAH! Everything's gonna be alright.
I see your point, but personally I would push for no seat belt laws...
Now assuming we live under a government that governs everything, then, sure I guess its somewhat hypocritical.
Great point,
It’s against the law for us not to wear seatbelts in the name of protection and lowering the cost of medical treatment but nothing is done to install breathalyzers to protect drunk drivers and the people they might crash into. Very good observation!
My car has four airbags (two side and two front), seatbelts all around, On-star with medical first aid response, satellite tracking, Low jack, rear sound system with headphones so the driver can have less distractions and many other “Safety” features, but not this breathalyzer to prevent me from driving drunk and killing another family. At least all these safety features in my own car would increase the chances that I survived.
So what’s the solution? Every person would have to have a small straw like tube on their key chain that they are responsible for keeping clean. Each car has a breathalyzer system and you simply connect your own personal tube to the car system and blow. Our family has many people driving the same car, not to mention mechanics that have to service the car, valet parking attendants, my mother –in –law and the list goes on and I personally don’t want to share the same tube and have all those germs being passed around thus the individual tubes would have to be a must. How easy are these systems to disable? Maybe the cost of all this is just too much?
It’s against the law for us not to wear seatbelts in the name of protection and lowering the cost of medical treatment but nothing is done to install breathalyzers to protect drunk drivers and the people they might crash into. Very good observation!
My car has four airbags (two side and two front), seatbelts all around, On-star with medical first aid response, satellite tracking, Low jack, rear sound system with headphones so the driver can have less distractions and many other “Safety” features, but not this breathalyzer to prevent me from driving drunk and killing another family. At least all these safety features in my own car would increase the chances that I survived.
So what’s the solution? Every person would have to have a small straw like tube on their key chain that they are responsible for keeping clean. Each car has a breathalyzer system and you simply connect your own personal tube to the car system and blow. Our family has many people driving the same car, not to mention mechanics that have to service the car, valet parking attendants, my mother –in –law and the list goes on and I personally don’t want to share the same tube and have all those germs being passed around thus the individual tubes would have to be a must. How easy are these systems to disable? Maybe the cost of all this is just too much?